Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

content-refiner(内容精炼者)

用于辅助文档、README、Markdown、说明文和内容稿件的整理与改写。它适合让 Agent 提炼结构、补齐章节、统一术语、检查链接或把零散材料整理成可读文档。使用时应保留项目已有事实、命令和路径,不要把未确认的信息写成确定结论;涉及对外文案时,还需要控制语气,避免过度营销或夸大能力。

content-refiner 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为只读;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 41,842。

总安装 1,129周安装 48GitHub Stars 158下载 396核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
unknown

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:content-refiner(内容精炼者)
来源仓库:https://github.com/panaversity/agentfactory
仓库路径:skills/content-refiner
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/panaversity/agentfactory --skill content-refiner
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/panaversity/agentfactory --skill content-refiner

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

专治 Gate 4 审核失败的后期修正工具,聚焦删减冗余与修复逻辑断层。诊断具体失败原因(字数或连贯性)后针对性优化。仅接受明确失败反馈作为输入,拒绝盲目重写请求。

安装方式:通过 GitHub 仓库安装,命令为 npx skills add https://github.com/panaversity/agentfactory --skill content-refiner。注意:为后置修正环节,不可独立用于初稿创作。

来源仓库内路径:skills/content-refiner

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 npx skills add https://github.com/panaversity/agentfactory --skill content-refin…;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它标注为只读,先用只读任务试一次,确认行为符合预期再扩大使用范围。

常见问题

6 条

content-refiner 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/panaversity/agentfactory --skill content-refiner。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

content-refiner 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

content-refiner 需要什么权限?

权限级别是只读。该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

content-refiner 是免费的吗?

公开资料没有标注明确许可证,收费和商用限制都无法确认。正式使用前请到来源仓库核对授权说明。

content-refiner 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 1,129 次,近一周安装 48 次,下载 396 次,GitHub 158 星。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

content-refiner 安全吗?

第三方扫描结果为通过,但这只覆盖已知的静态检查项,不能替代自己读一遍源码和安装命令。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 同时适配 4 种工具,换客户端不用重新找替代品。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。
  • 标注为只读权限,试用阶段不容易误改本地文件。

先想清楚的地方

  • 许可证没有明确标注,能不能商用、能不能再分发都不确定。
  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 Codex,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。
  • 只想先试试效果、不希望它改动本地文件的人。

不太适合

  • 需要明确授权才能用到公司项目里的场景。
  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
content-refiner

内容精炼者 · 本页

1,129158只读未明确通过

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

Content Refiner (The Fixer)

Purpose

POST-GATE TOOL. Transforms content that FAILED Gate 4 into passing content. Focuses on trimming verbosity and fixing continuity.

When to Use

  • Trigger: Gate 4 (Acceptance Auditor) returned [FAIL].
  • Goal: Fix word count OR continuity issues (or both).
  • Key: Diagnose what failed BEFORE applying fixes.

CRITICAL: Pre-Refinement Diagnosis

DO NOT apply fixes blindly. Gate 4 fails for different reasons requiring different strategies.

Step 0: Identify What Failed (Mandatory)

Ask the user OR examine the Gate 4 failure message:

Failure TypeQuestionAction
Word Count"Is the lesson over the target (typically 1500 words)?"Calculate exact % to cut
Continuity"Does the opening reference the previous lesson?"Rewrite opening only
Both"Word count AND continuity broken?"Two-phase approach

DIAGNOSIS EXAMPLES:

Example 1: Word Count Only

Content: 1950 words, Target: 1500
Excess: 450 words
% to cut: (450 / 1950) × 100 = 23%
→ CUT EXACTLY 23%, not generic 15-20%

Example 2: Continuity Only

Opening: "Let's explore this new topic..."
Problem: Doesn't reference Lesson N-1
→ Rewrite opening only; don't cut words

Example 3: Both

Word count: 1950 (23% over)
Opening: Generic, missing prior lesson reference
→ Phase 1: Rewrite opening (identify anchor from Lesson N-1)
→ Phase 2: Cut words to 23% (context-aware)

Step 1: Assess Content Layer (Context-Aware Cutting)

Read the lesson's frontmatter to determine layer:

LayerCutting Strategy
L1 (Manual)Keep foundational explanations; cut elaboration
L2 (AI-Collaboration)Keep Try With AI sections (core); cut narrative padding
L3 (Intelligence)Keep pattern insights; cut explanatory scaffolding
L4 (Spec-Driven)Keep specification details; cut conceptual scaffolding

The Refinement Procedure (Layer-Aware)

Phase 1: The Connection Builder (Continuity Fix)

Do this FIRST if opening is generic.

Formula:

In [Previous Lesson], you [SPECIFIC OUTCOME from Lesson N-1].
Now, we will [CONNECT outcome to new goal] by [STRATEGY].

Validation:

  • Opening references Lesson N-1 by name
  • Specific outcome (not generic "learned about...")
  • Clear connection shows why this lesson matters (builds on N-1)

After fixing: Proceed to Fluff Cutter if word count also fails.

Phase 2: The Fluff Cutter (Word Count Fix)

Apply layer-specific cuts in this order:

FOR ALL LAYERS:

  1. Delete redundant "Why This Matters" sections

- Keep ONLY if it reveals non-obvious insight - If same point made in text AND in "Why This Matters" → delete WTM

  1. Merge repeated examples

- Find duplicate explanations - Keep first, delete second

  1. Tighten transitions between sections

- Replace "As we discussed earlier, X..." with direct reference

FOR L1-L2 ONLY (students still building foundation): 4. Reduce "Try With AI" sections to exactly 2 prompts

  • Keep foundational + one advanced
  • Delete exploratory extras
  1. Keep educational scaffolding (explanations, examples)

FOR L3-L4 ONLY (students ready for advanced patterns): 4. Trim narrative scaffolding

  • Keep pattern insights and rules
  • Delete "why this matters philosophically"
  1. Remove beginner-level explanations

- Assume students understand fundamentals

FOR ALL LAYERS: 6. One Analogy Rule: Keep the BEST analogy for the concept; delete redundant ones 7. Merge Tables/Text: Use ONE format (table OR prose), never both 8. Reduce Examples: Keep 2-3 best; delete "also consider..." 9. Tighten Lists: Convert 5-item lists to 3 core items

Verification:

  • Word count after cuts: [TARGET ± 5%]
  • No L1 content cut from L1 lessons
  • No pattern insights lost from L3-L4 lessons
  • Try With AI: 2 prompts if L1-L2, keep all if L3-L4

Phase 3: Post-Refinement Validation (CRITICAL)

After applying fixes, verify the content now PASSES Gate 4:

✓ Word Count Check:
  Current: [X] words
  Target: [target_from_spec]
  Status: [PASS if ≤target ± 5%, FAIL if over]

✓ Continuity Check:
  Opening references Lesson [N-1]? [YES/NO]
  Specific outcome mentioned? [YES/NO]
  Connection to new lesson clear? [YES/NO]

✓ Layer Appropriateness:
  No foundational cuts from L1-L2? [YES/NO]
  No pattern insight loss from L3-L4? [YES/NO]

✓ Content Integrity:
  Removed examples still explained elsewhere? [YES/NO]
  Cut sections non-essential? [YES/NO]

NEXT STEP RECOMMENDATION:

"Refined content is ready.

Word count: [after] (target: ≤[target])
Continuity: Now references Lesson [N-1]

Recommend re-submitting to acceptance-auditor for Gate 4 re-validation.
Command: [provide re-validation instruction]"

Output Format

## Refinement Report: [Lesson Name]

### Diagnosis
**Issue Found**: [Word count | Continuity | Both]
**Layer**: [L1/L2/L3/L4]

### Metrics
| Metric | Before | After | Target | Status |
|--------|--------|-------|--------|--------|
| Word Count | 1950 | 1485 | ≤1500 | ✅ PASS |
| Continuity | Generic opening | References Lesson 2 | Specific reference | ✅ PASS |

### Fixes Applied
1. **Phase 1**: Rewrote opening to reference "booking-agent implementation" from Lesson 2
2. **Phase 2**: Deleted 240 words using layer-aware cuts:
   - Removed redundant "Why This Matters" section (line 45, 120 words)
   - Merged duplicate example (lines 67-89, 85 words)
   - Cut 1 extra "Try With AI" prompt (35 words)
3. **Phase 3**: Validated word count and continuity

### Ready for Re-validation
✅ Word count: 1485 (≤1500)
✅ Continuity: Opening references Lesson 2
✅ Layer integrity: All L2 AI examples preserved

**Next**: Re-submit to acceptance-auditor for Gate 4 validation

### Refined Content
[Full refined lesson content]

平台分布

Codex

34.61%
按下载量换算137

Claude

30.41%
按下载量换算120

Cursor

21.04%
按下载量换算83

Gemini CLI

11.07%
按下载量换算44

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

只读

该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills