Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

decompose-plan(分解计划)

decompose-plan 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 OpenClaw 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

decompose-plan 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 OpenClaw,通过ClawHub获取,权限为需要联网;许可证为 MIT-0,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 30,309。

总安装 2,899周安装 122GitHub Stars 公开资料未说明下载 1,015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
MIT-0
版本
1.0.0

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:decompose-plan(分解计划)
来源仓库:https://github.com/stephenlthorn/decompose-plan
安装命令:
openclaw skills install decompose-plan
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 OpenClaw 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。

ClawHubOpenClaw
openclaw skills install decompose-plan

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。

强制生成结构化开发计划,避免隐含推理,提升代码编写前思考清晰度。适用于复杂项目开发前的任务分解与步骤规划。帮助明确思路树结构,增强开发流程可控性。安装前需确认权限范围、维护状态及是否影响本地执行环境。decompose-plan 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

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 OpenClaw;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 openclaw skills install decompose-plan;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

    它需要需要联网,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

decompose-plan 怎么安装?

在终端执行 openclaw skills install decompose-plan。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

decompose-plan 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 OpenClaw。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。

decompose-plan 需要什么权限?

权限级别是需要联网。该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

decompose-plan 是免费的吗?

来源标注的许可证是 MIT-0。本站不代收任何费用,也不托管安装包;能否商用、要不要署名,以许可证原文为准。

decompose-plan 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 2,899 次,近一周安装 122 次,下载 1,015 次。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。

decompose-plan 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

  • 专注 OpenClaw 一种宿主,触发方式和使用习惯不用来回切换。
  • 许可证明确为 MIT-0,商用和分发边界好判断。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。

先想清楚的地方

  • 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 OpenClaw,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。
  • 需要许可证清楚、并且有第三方扫描结果的团队项目。

不太适合

  • 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
decompose-plan

分解计划 · 本页

2,899—需要联网MIT-0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

name
decompose-plan
version
1.0.0
description
|
triggers
tools
inputs
outputs
sub_problems
list of {title, description, depends_on}
apis
list of {name, version_requirement, purpose}
risks
list of {risk, mitigation, severity}
files_affected
list of {path, change_type}
order
ordered list of sub_problem titles
estimated_loc
integer
metadata
openclaw
category
coding
tags
requires_openclaw
>=2026.3.31
env_vars

Decompose and Plan

The problem this solves

Local models generate code reactively — they start typing the moment they see the task. This works for trivial tasks but produces mediocre output for anything complex. Sonnet's "extended thinking" mode is essentially a forced decomposition pass before generation.

We can replicate this behavior with M2.7 by requiring it to fill out a structured plan template before any code is written. The act of filling the template is the reasoning step.

The planning prompt

You are planning the implementation of the following task. Your job is NOT
to write code yet — only to plan.

Task: {task}

{rag_context_if_any}

Produce a plan in the following exact JSON structure:

{ "sub_problems": [ { "title": "short title", "description": "one paragraph describing what must be done", "depends_on": ["title of prior sub_problem"] or [] } ], "apis": [ { "name": "Framework.API.name", "version_requirement": "iOS 18+" or "Python 3.11+" or "none", "purpose": "why this API is needed" } ], "risks": [ { "risk": "specific thing that could go wrong", "mitigation": "how to avoid or handle it", "severity": "high" | "medium" | "low" } ], "files_affected": [ { "path": "relative/path/to/file.ext", "change_type": "create" | "modify" | "delete" } ], "order": ["sub_problem title", "sub_problem title", ...], "estimated_loc": integer }


Requirements:
1. Break the task into 2-6 sub_problems. Fewer is better if possible.
2. List ALL APIs you will use, including their version requirements.
   If using iOS/Swift APIs, check iOS 26 deprecations.
3. Identify at least 2 risks. "No risks" is never acceptable — be critical.
4. File list must be complete — no files added later during implementation.
5. Order must be a valid topological sort of sub_problems based on depends_on.
6. Estimated LOC should be realistic. If > 500, flag for decomposition into
   smaller tasks.

Output ONLY the JSON. No explanation, no preamble, no markdown fences.

Execution

async def decompose_plan(task, rag_context=None, specialist_prompt=None,
                        force_schema=True):
    prompt = PLANNING_PROMPT.format(
        task=task,
        rag_context_if_any=f"\
Relevant context:\
{rag_context}\
" if rag_context else ""
    )

    system = specialist_prompt or "You are a senior engineer planning code."

    response = await llm.generate(
        prompt=prompt,
        model="m27-jangtq-crack",
        system=system,
        temperature=0.2,  # low temp for structured output
        max_tokens=2000
    )

    # Parse JSON
    try:
        plan = json.loads(response.strip().strip("`").strip("json").strip())
    except json.JSONDecodeError:
        # Try to extract JSON from response
        match = re.search(r"\{.*\}", response, re.DOTALL)
        if match:
            plan = json.loads(match.group())
        else:
            if force_schema:
                raise PlanSchemaError("Model did not produce valid JSON")
            return {"error": "parse_failed", "raw": response}

    # Validate schema
    required_keys = {"sub_problems", "apis", "risks", "files_affected",
                     "order", "estimated_loc"}
    missing = required_keys - set(plan.keys())
    if missing and force_schema:
        raise PlanSchemaError(f"Missing keys: {missing}")

    # Validate order is topological
    if not _is_valid_topological(plan["sub_problems"], plan["order"]):
        raise PlanSchemaError("order is not a valid topological sort")

    # Flag if estimated_loc too large
    if plan["estimated_loc"] > 500:
        plan["warning"] = "Task may be too large — consider decomposing further"

    return plan


def _is_valid_topological(sub_problems, order):
    title_to_deps = {sp["title"]: set(sp.get("depends_on", [])) for sp in sub_problems}
    seen = set()
    for title in order:
        if title_to_deps[title] - seen:
            return False
        seen.add(title)
    return True

Using the plan downstream

The plan becomes part of the context for code generation. Inject it like:

You have planned this task as follows:

{plan_as_readable_text}

Implement ONLY the sub_problem "{current_sub_problem}" now.
Do not attempt sub_problems that come later in the order.

This keeps the generation focused on one concern at a time and leverages the decomposition to prevent the model from trying to write everything at once.

Why force the schema

Without schema enforcement, M2.7 tends to produce prose plans that are easy to generate but hard to use programmatically. Structured JSON forces the model to commit to specifics: exact file paths, exact API versions, exact risk factors. Vagueness becomes syntactically impossible.

When to skip this skill

For tasks where decomposition adds no value:

  • Single-line fixes ("rename this variable")
  • Trivial format conversions ("convert this JSON to CSV")
  • Questions rather than implementation requests
  • Tasks under 30 lines of expected output

The orchestrator handles this triage — decompose-plan is only invoked when it will add value.

Output usage

The parent orchestrator stores the plan in task.scratchpad["plan"]. Subsequent steps (generation, build-feedback, reflection) read from this plan rather than re-deriving what the task is about.

For iOS tasks specifically, the plan's apis section feeds into:

  • RAG query expansion (retrieve docs for those specific APIs)
  • Build feedback (validate those APIs are actually available at target iOS version)
  • Reflection checklist (verify those APIs are used correctly)

Failure modes

If M2.7 can't produce a valid plan after 2 retries, escalate to claude-handoff. This is a strong signal that the task is outside local capability — if the model can't even plan it, it certainly can't implement it.

平台分布

OpenClaw

85.86%
按下载量换算871

安全审计

VirusTotal

通过

ClawScan

通过

Static analysis

通过

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

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