Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

git-conflict-resolve(git 冲突解决)

git-conflict-resolve 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 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。

git-conflict-resolve 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 43,786。

总安装 960周安装 40GitHub Stars 6下载 320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:git-conflict-resolve(git 冲突解决)
来源仓库:https://github.com/duc01226/easyplatform
仓库路径:skills/git-conflict-resolve
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/duc01226/easyplatform --skill git-conflict-resolve
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/duc01226/easyplatform --skill git-conflict-resolve

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。

git-conflict-resolve 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息。适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果。通过 npx skills add 命令从指定 GitHub 仓库安装使用。

安装前需确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写操作。适用宿主包括 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,接入前应确认版本、权限和运行环境要求。

来源仓库内路径:skills/git-conflict-resolve

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/duc01226/easyplatform --skill git-conflict-res…;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

git-conflict-resolve 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/duc01226/easyplatform --skill git-conflict-resolve。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

git-conflict-resolve 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。

git-conflict-resolve 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。

git-conflict-resolve 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。

git-conflict-resolve 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 960 次,近一周安装 40 次,下载 320 次,GitHub 6 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。

git-conflict-resolve 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
git-conflict-resolve

git 冲突解决 · 本页

9606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

[IMPORTANT] Use TaskCreate to break ALL work into small tasks BEFORE starting — including tasks for each file read. This prevents context loss from long files. For simple tasks, AI MUST ATTENTION ask user whether to skip.

Prerequisites: MUST ATTENTION READ before executing:

Understand Code First — HARD-GATE: Do NOT write, plan, or fix until you READ existing code. 1. Search 3+ similar patterns (grep/glob) — cite file:line evidence 2. Read existing files in target area — understand structure, base classes, conventions 3. Run python.claude/scripts/code_graph trace <file> --direction both --json when .code-graph/graph.db exists 4. Map dependencies via connections or callers_of — know what depends on your target 5. Write investigation to .ai/workspace/analysis/ for non-trivial tasks (3+ files) 6. Re-read analysis file before implementing — never work from memory alone 7. NEVER invent new patterns when existing ones work — match exactly or document deviation BLOCKED until: - [] Read target files - [] Grep 3+ patterns - [] Graph trace (if graph.db exists) - [] Assumptions verified with evidence

Quick Summary

Goal: Resolve git merge/cherry-pick/rebase conflicts with backup, analysis, and structured reporting.

Workflow:

  1. Backup — Create safety backup of current state
  2. Analyze — Identify conflict types and affected files
  3. Resolve — Apply resolution strategy per conflict
  4. Report — Generate conflict resolution report

Key Rules:

  • Always create backup before resolving conflicts
  • Prefer preserving both sides' intent over arbitrary choice
  • Generate resolution report for audit trail

Be skeptical. Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence percentages (Idea should be more than 80%).

Purpose

Systematically resolve git conflicts (merge, cherry-pick, rebase) with:

  1. Backup of all conflicted files before resolution
  2. Per-file conflict analysis with root cause explanation
  3. Resolution with documented rationale
  4. Comprehensive report generation

Variables

OPERATION: auto-detect (cherry-pick, merge, rebase) from git state REPORT_PATH: plans/reports/conflict-resolution-{date}-{operation}-{source}.md BACKUP_PATH: .ai/workspace/conflict-backups-{date}/

Workflow

Step 1: Detect conflict state

# Detect operation type
git status  # Check for "cherry-pick in progress", "merge in progress", etc.

# List all conflicted files
git diff --name-only --diff-filter=U  # Unmerged files (both modified)
git status --short | grep "^DU\|^UD\|^UU\|^AA\|^DD"  # All conflict types

Classify each conflict:

  • DU (Deleted by us): File exists on source but not on target branch
  • UD (Deleted by them): File exists on target but deleted by source
  • UU (Both modified): Both branches modified the same file
  • AA (Both added): Both branches added a file at the same path
  • DD (Both deleted): Both branches deleted the file

Step 2: Create backup files

MANDATORY before any resolution.

mkdir -p {BACKUP_PATH}

# For each conflicted file, copy WITH conflict markers preserved
cp <conflicted-file> {BACKUP_PATH}/<filename>.conflict

Create a TaskCreate item for each conflicted file PLUS report and review tasks.

Step 3: Analyze each conflict (per file)

For each conflicted file, perform this analysis:

3a. Understand the conflict type
  • DU/UD (deleted by one side): Check if the file was introduced in a commit not present on the target branch. Read the file content from the source commit to understand what it provides.
  • UU (both modified): Read the conflict markers. Identify what each side changed and why.
3b. Read both versions
# For UU conflicts: read the file with conflict markers
# Look for <<<<<<< HEAD / ======= / >>>>>>> markers

# For DU conflicts: get the source version
git show <source-commit>:<file-path>

# Optionally extract clean versions
git show HEAD:<file-path> > {BACKUP_PATH}/<filename>.ours
git show <source-commit>:<file-path> > {BACKUP_PATH}/<filename>.theirs
3c. Analyze dependencies
  • Check callers: Do other files reference methods/classes in this file? Are caller names compatible?
  • Check constructor/DI: Does the resolution require new dependencies?
  • Check cross-file consistency: Will the resolution break other files?
3d. Determine resolution strategy
Conflict PatternResolution Strategy
DU: File needed by featureAccept theirs (add the file)
DU: File not neededKeep ours (skip the file)
UU: Non-overlapping changesMerge both (keep all changes)
UU: Overlapping, source modifies methods not on targetKeep ours if methods don't exist on target
UU: Overlapping, both modify same methodManual merge with careful analysis
UU: Schema/snapshot filesAccept theirs for new entities, merge for modified

Step 4: Resolve each conflict

Apply the determined strategy:

# Accept theirs (source version)
git checkout --theirs <file> && git add <file>

# Keep ours (target version)
git checkout --ours <file> && git add <file>

# Manual merge: Edit the file to remove conflict markers, then:
git add <file>

For manual merges:

  1. Remove <<<<<<< HEAD, =======, >>>>>>> <commit> markers
  2. Keep the correct content from each side
  3. Verify no leftover conflict markers: git diff --check

Step 5: Verify resolution

# Check no unmerged files remain
git diff --name-only --diff-filter=U

# Check no leftover conflict markers
git diff --check

# Review overall status
git status

Step 6: Complete the operation

# For cherry-pick
git cherry-pick --continue --no-edit

# For merge
git commit  # (merge commit is auto-prepared)

# For rebase
git rebase --continue

Step 7: Generate report

Create a comprehensive report at {REPORT_PATH} with:

  1. Header: Date, source commit/branch, target branch, result commit
  2. Summary: Total conflicts, categories, overall risk
  3. Per-file details:

- File path - Conflict type (DU/UU/etc.) - Root cause (why the conflict occurred) - Resolution chosen (accept theirs/keep ours/manual merge) - Rationale (why this resolution was chosen) - Risk level (Low/Medium/High)

  1. Summary table: All files with conflict type, resolution, risk
  2. Root cause analysis: Common patterns across conflicts
  3. Recommendations: Follow-up actions, build verification, etc.

Step 8: Final review

  • Verify report is complete and accurate
  • Check that all backup files exist
  • Confirm build passes (if applicable)
  • Flag any Medium/High risk resolutions for user attention

Resolution Decision Framework

When to "Accept Theirs" (source version)

  • File is NEW (DU) and required by the feature being cherry-picked/merged
  • File contains schema/config additions needed by new entities
  • Source has strictly more content (e.g., empty class → populated class)

When to "Keep Ours" (target version)

  • Source modifies methods that don't exist on target (added by uncommitted prerequisite)
  • Source renames methods/types that target callers still reference by old names
  • Changes are not required for the feature being brought in

When to "Manual Merge"

  • Both sides have legitimate changes that need to coexist
  • Schema files where both add new entries (keep both)
  • Config files where both add new sections

Risk Assessment

RiskCriteriaAction
LowNew file, no existing code affectedProceed
MediumMethod changes, caller compatibility uncertainFlag in report, recommend build verification
HighBreaking changes, cross-service impactRequire user confirmation before proceeding

Notes

  • Always create backup files BEFORE any resolution
  • Never force-resolve without understanding the root cause
  • For complex conflicts (>3 conflict regions in one file), extract both clean versions for side-by-side analysis
  • Check for prerequisite commits: if a cherry-pick modifies files from prior commits not on target, note this in the report
  • Use git diff <commit>^..<commit> -- <file> to see the actual diff of a specific commit (not the full file state)

Closing Reminders

  • MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION break work into small todo tasks using TaskCreate BEFORE starting
  • MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION search codebase for 3+ similar patterns before creating new code
  • MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION cite file:line evidence for every claim (confidence >80% to act)
  • MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION add a final review todo task to verify work quality
  • MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION search 3+ existing patterns and read code BEFORE any modification. Run graph trace when graph.db exists.

平台分布

Codex

36.73%
按下载量换算118

Claude

27.26%
按下载量换算87

Cursor

16.57%
按下载量换算53

Gemini CLI

9.59%
按下载量换算31

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