Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

solid-principles(扎实的原则)

用于辅助 Java 项目开发、面向对象设计、Spring 生态、Maven 或 Gradle 依赖和后端工程实践。它适合让 Agent 分析类结构、设计接口、整理服务分层、生成测试或检查常见代码坏味道。使用时需要结合项目已有架构、包结构和依赖版本,不应只按通用教程改代码;涉及数据库、事务、并发或框架配置时,应先确认运行环境和回归测试范围。

solid-principles 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 40,251。

总安装 1,309周安装 54GitHub Stars 539下载 428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:solid-principles(扎实的原则)
来源仓库:https://github.com/decebals/claude-code-java
仓库路径:skills/solid-principles
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/decebals/claude-code-java --skill solid-principles
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/decebals/claude-code-java --skill solid-principles

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。

该技能验证 Java 类设计是否符合 SOLID 原则。适用于重构大文件或拆分职责过重类场景。通过 GitHub 仓库安装,提供各原则违反的典型反例。建议优先处理 Single Responsibility 违规,降低修改影响面。

solid-principles 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

来源仓库内路径:skills/solid-principles

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/decebals/claude-code-java --skill solid-princi…;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

solid-principles 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/decebals/claude-code-java --skill solid-principles。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

solid-principles 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。

solid-principles 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。

solid-principles 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。

solid-principles 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 1,309 次,近一周安装 54 次,下载 428 次,GitHub 539 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。

solid-principles 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
solid-principles

扎实的原则 · 本页

1,309539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

SOLID Principles Skill

Review and apply SOLID principles in Java code.

When to Use

  • User says "check SOLID" / "SOLID review" / "is this class doing too much?"
  • Reviewing class design
  • Refactoring large classes
  • Code review focusing on design

Quick Reference

LetterPrincipleOne-liner
SSingle ResponsibilityOne class = one reason to change
OOpen/ClosedOpen for extension, closed for modification
LLiskov SubstitutionSubtypes must be substitutable for base types
IInterface SegregationMany specific interfaces > one general interface
DDependency InversionDepend on abstractions, not concretions

S - Single Responsibility Principle (SRP)

"A class should have only one reason to change."

Violation

// ❌ BAD: UserService does too much
public class UserService {

    public User createUser(String name, String email) {
        // validation logic
        if (email == null || !email.contains("@")) {
            throw new IllegalArgumentException("Invalid email");
        }

        // persistence logic
        User user = new User(name, email);
        entityManager.persist(user);

        // notification logic
        String subject = "Welcome!";
        String body = "Hello " + name;
        emailClient.send(email, subject, body);

        // audit logic
        auditLog.log("User created: " + email);

        return user;
    }
}

Problems:

  • Validation changes? Modify UserService
  • Email template changes? Modify UserService
  • Audit format changes? Modify UserService
  • Hard to test each concern separately

Refactored

// ✅ GOOD: Each class has one responsibility

public class UserValidator {
    public void validate(String name, String email) {
        if (email == null || !email.contains("@")) {
            throw new ValidationException("Invalid email");
        }
    }
}

public class UserRepository {
    public User save(User user) {
        entityManager.persist(user);
        return user;
    }
}

public class WelcomeEmailSender {
    public void sendWelcome(User user) {
        String subject = "Welcome!";
        String body = "Hello " + user.getName();
        emailClient.send(user.getEmail(), subject, body);
    }
}

public class UserAuditLogger {
    public void logCreation(User user) {
        auditLog.log("User created: " + user.getEmail());
    }
}

public class UserService {
    private final UserValidator validator;
    private final UserRepository repository;
    private final WelcomeEmailSender emailSender;
    private final UserAuditLogger auditLogger;

    public User createUser(String name, String email) {
        validator.validate(name, email);
        User user = repository.save(new User(name, email));
        emailSender.sendWelcome(user);
        auditLogger.logCreation(user);
        return user;
    }
}

How to Detect SRP Violations

  • Class has many import statements from different domains
  • Class name contains "And" or "Manager" or "Handler" (often)
  • Methods operate on unrelated data
  • Changes in one area require touching unrelated methods
  • Hard to name the class concisely

Quick Check Questions

  1. Can you describe the class purpose in one sentence without "and"?
  2. Would different stakeholders request changes to this class?
  3. Are there methods that don't use most of the class fields?

O - Open/Closed Principle (OCP)

"Software entities should be open for extension, but closed for modification."

Violation

// ❌ BAD: Must modify class to add new discount type
public class DiscountCalculator {

    public double calculate(Order order, String discountType) {
        if (discountType.equals("PERCENTAGE")) {
            return order.getTotal() * 0.1;
        } else if (discountType.equals("FIXED")) {
            return 50.0;
        } else if (discountType.equals("LOYALTY")) {
            return order.getTotal() * order.getCustomer().getLoyaltyRate();
        }
        // Every new discount type = modify this class
        return 0;
    }
}

Refactored

// ✅ GOOD: Add new discounts without modifying existing code

public interface DiscountStrategy {
    double calculate(Order order);
    boolean supports(String discountType);
}

public class PercentageDiscount implements DiscountStrategy {
    @Override
    public double calculate(Order order) {
        return order.getTotal() * 0.1;
    }

    @Override
    public boolean supports(String discountType) {
        return "PERCENTAGE".equals(discountType);
    }
}

public class FixedDiscount implements DiscountStrategy {
    @Override
    public double calculate(Order order) {
        return 50.0;
    }

    @Override
    public boolean supports(String discountType) {
        return "FIXED".equals(discountType);
    }
}

public class LoyaltyDiscount implements DiscountStrategy {
    @Override
    public double calculate(Order order) {
        return order.getTotal() * order.getCustomer().getLoyaltyRate();
    }

    @Override
    public boolean supports(String discountType) {
        return "LOYALTY".equals(discountType);
    }
}

// New discount? Just add new class, no modification needed
public class SeasonalDiscount implements DiscountStrategy {
    @Override
    public double calculate(Order order) {
        return order.getTotal() * 0.2;
    }

    @Override
    public boolean supports(String discountType) {
        return "SEASONAL".equals(discountType);
    }
}

public class DiscountCalculator {
    private final List<DiscountStrategy> strategies;

    public DiscountCalculator(List<DiscountStrategy> strategies) {
        this.strategies = strategies;
    }

    public double calculate(Order order, String discountType) {
        return strategies.stream()
            .filter(s -> s.supports(discountType))
            .findFirst()
            .map(s -> s.calculate(order))
            .orElse(0.0);
    }
}

How to Detect OCP Violations

  • if/else or switch on type/status that grows over time
  • Enum-based dispatching with frequent new values
  • Changes require modifying core classes

Common OCP Patterns

PatternUse When
StrategyMultiple algorithms for same operation
Template MethodSame structure, different steps
DecoratorAdd behavior dynamically
FactoryCreate objects without specifying class

L - Liskov Substitution Principle (LSP)

"Subtypes must be substitutable for their base types."

Violation

// ❌ BAD: Square violates Rectangle contract
public class Rectangle {
    protected int width;
    protected int height;

    public void setWidth(int width) {
        this.width = width;
    }

    public void setHeight(int height) {
        this.height = height;
    }

    public int getArea() {
        return width * height;
    }
}

public class Square extends Rectangle {
    @Override
    public void setWidth(int width) {
        this.width = width;
        this.height = width;  // Violates expected behavior!
    }

    @Override
    public void setHeight(int height) {
        this.width = height;  // Violates expected behavior!
        this.height = height;
    }
}

// This test fails for Square!
void testRectangle(Rectangle r) {
    r.setWidth(5);
    r.setHeight(4);
    assert r.getArea() == 20;  // Square returns 16!
}

Refactored

// ✅ GOOD: Separate abstractions

public interface Shape {
    int getArea();
}

public class Rectangle implements Shape {
    private final int width;
    private final int height;

    public Rectangle(int width, int height) {
        this.width = width;
        this.height = height;
    }

    @Override
    public int getArea() {
        return width * height;
    }
}

public class Square implements Shape {
    private final int side;

    public Square(int side) {
        this.side = side;
    }

    @Override
    public int getArea() {
        return side * side;
    }
}

LSP Rules

RuleMeaning
PreconditionsSubclass cannot strengthen (require more)
PostconditionsSubclass cannot weaken (promise less)
InvariantsSubclass must maintain parent's invariants
HistorySubclass cannot modify inherited state unexpectedly

How to Detect LSP Violations

  • Subclass throws exception parent doesn't
  • Subclass returns null where parent returns object
  • Subclass ignores or overrides parent behavior unexpectedly
  • instanceof checks before calling methods
  • Empty or throwing implementations of interface methods

Quick Check

// If you see this, LSP might be violated
if (bird instanceof Penguin) {
    // don't call fly()
} else {
    bird.fly();
}

I - Interface Segregation Principle (ISP)

"Clients should not be forced to depend on interfaces they do not use."

Violation

// ❌ BAD: Fat interface forces unnecessary implementations
public interface Worker {
    void work();
    void eat();
    void sleep();
    void attendMeeting();
    void writeReport();
}

// Robot can't eat or sleep!
public class Robot implements Worker {
    @Override public void work() { /* OK */ }
    @Override public void eat() { /* Can't eat! */ }
    @Override public void sleep() { /* Can't sleep! */ }
    @Override public void attendMeeting() { /* OK */ }
    @Override public void writeReport() { /* Maybe */ }
}

// Intern doesn't attend meetings or write reports
public class Intern implements Worker {
    @Override public void work() { /* OK */ }
    @Override public void eat() { /* OK */ }
    @Override public void sleep() { /* OK */ }
    @Override public void attendMeeting() { /* Not allowed! */ }
    @Override public void writeReport() { /* Not expected! */ }
}

Refactored

// ✅ GOOD: Segregated interfaces

public interface Workable {
    void work();
}

public interface Feedable {
    void eat();
    void sleep();
}

public interface Manageable {
    void attendMeeting();
    void writeReport();
}

// Combine what you need
public class Employee implements Workable, Feedable, Manageable {
    @Override public void work() { /* ... */ }
    @Override public void eat() { /* ... */ }
    @Override public void sleep() { /* ... */ }
    @Override public void attendMeeting() { /* ... */ }
    @Override public void writeReport() { /* ... */ }
}

public class Robot implements Workable {
    @Override public void work() { /* ... */ }
    // No unnecessary methods!
}

public class Intern implements Workable, Feedable {
    @Override public void work() { /* ... */ }
    @Override public void eat() { /* ... */ }
    @Override public void sleep() { /* ... */ }
    // No meeting/report methods!
}

How to Detect ISP Violations

  • Implementations with empty methods or throw new UnsupportedOperationException()
  • Interface has 10+ methods
  • Different clients use completely different subsets of methods
  • Changes to interface affect unrelated implementations

Java Standard Library Violations

// java.util.List has many methods - but this is acceptable for collections
// However, be careful with your own interfaces!

// ❌ This interface is too fat for most use cases
public interface Repository<T> {
    T findById(Long id);
    List<T> findAll();
    T save(T entity);
    void delete(T entity);
    void deleteById(Long id);
    List<T> findByExample(T example);
    Page<T> findAll(Pageable pageable);
    List<T> findAllById(Iterable<Long> ids);
    long count();
    boolean existsById(Long id);
    // ... 20 more methods
}

// ✅ Better: Split by use case
public interface ReadRepository<T> {
    Optional<T> findById(Long id);
    List<T> findAll();
}

public interface WriteRepository<T> {
    T save(T entity);
    void delete(T entity);
}

D - Dependency Inversion Principle (DIP)

"High-level modules should not depend on low-level modules. Both should depend on abstractions."

Violation

// ❌ BAD: High-level depends on low-level directly
public class OrderService {
    private MySqlOrderRepository repository;  // Concrete class!
    private SmtpEmailSender emailSender;      // Concrete class!

    public OrderService() {
        this.repository = new MySqlOrderRepository();  // Hard dependency
        this.emailSender = new SmtpEmailSender();      // Hard dependency
    }

    public void createOrder(Order order) {
        repository.save(order);
        emailSender.send(order.getCustomerEmail(), "Order confirmed");
    }
}

Problems:

  • Cannot test without real MySQL database
  • Cannot swap email provider
  • OrderService knows about MySQL, SMTP details

Refactored

// ✅ GOOD: Depend on abstractions

// Abstractions (interfaces)
public interface OrderRepository {
    void save(Order order);
    Optional<Order> findById(Long id);
}

public interface NotificationSender {
    void send(String recipient, String message);
}

// High-level module depends on abstractions
public class OrderService {
    private final OrderRepository repository;
    private final NotificationSender notificationSender;

    // Dependencies injected
    public OrderService(OrderRepository repository,
                        NotificationSender notificationSender) {
        this.repository = repository;
        this.notificationSender = notificationSender;
    }

    public void createOrder(Order order) {
        repository.save(order);
        notificationSender.send(order.getCustomerEmail(), "Order confirmed");
    }
}

// Low-level modules implement abstractions
public class MySqlOrderRepository implements OrderRepository {
    @Override
    public void save(Order order) { /* MySQL specific */ }

    @Override
    public Optional<Order> findById(Long id) { /* MySQL specific */ }
}

public class SmtpEmailSender implements NotificationSender {
    @Override
    public void send(String recipient, String message) { /* SMTP specific */ }
}

// Easy to test with mocks!
public class InMemoryOrderRepository implements OrderRepository {
    private Map<Long, Order> orders = new HashMap<>();

    @Override
    public void save(Order order) {
        orders.put(order.getId(), order);
    }

    @Override
    public Optional<Order> findById(Long id) {
        return Optional.ofNullable(orders.get(id));
    }
}

DIP with Spring

// Spring handles dependency injection automatically

@Service
public class OrderService {
    private final OrderRepository repository;
    private final NotificationSender notificationSender;

    // Constructor injection (recommended)
    public OrderService(OrderRepository repository,
                        NotificationSender notificationSender) {
        this.repository = repository;
        this.notificationSender = notificationSender;
    }
}

@Repository
public class JpaOrderRepository implements OrderRepository {
    // Spring provides implementation
}

@Component
@Profile("production")
public class SmtpEmailSender implements NotificationSender { }

@Component
@Profile("test")
public class MockEmailSender implements NotificationSender { }

How to Detect DIP Violations

  • new ConcreteClass() inside business logic
  • Import statements include implementation packages (e.g., com.mysql, org.apache.http)
  • Cannot easily swap implementations
  • Tests require real infrastructure (database, network)

SOLID Review Checklist

When reviewing code, check:

PrincipleQuestion
SRPDoes this class have more than one reason to change?
OCPWill adding a new type/feature require modifying this class?
LSPCan subclasses be used wherever parent is expected?
ISPAre there empty or throwing method implementations?
DIPDoes high-level code depend on concrete implementations?

Common Refactoring Patterns

ViolationRefactoring
SRP - God classExtract Class, Move Method
OCP - Type switchingStrategy Pattern, Factory
LSP - Broken inheritanceComposition over Inheritance, Extract Interface
ISP - Fat interfaceSplit Interface, Role Interface
DIP - Hard dependenciesDependency Injection, Abstract Factory

Related Skills

  • design-patterns - Implementation patterns (Factory, Strategy, Observer, etc.)
  • clean-code - Code-level principles (DRY, KISS, naming)
  • java-code-review - Comprehensive review checklist

平台分布

Codex

33.8%
按下载量换算145

Claude

30.21%
按下载量换算129

Cursor

18.05%
按下载量换算77

Gemini CLI

9.29%
按下载量换算40

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