Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

orchestrate(orchestrate 搜索)

orchestrate 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。

orchestrate 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,权限为调用外部服务;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描有提醒项,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 9,995。

总安装 13,259周安装 547GitHub Stars 6下载 4,332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:orchestrate(orchestrate 搜索)
来源仓库:https://github.com/hyperb1iss/hyperskills
仓库路径:skills/orchestrate
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/hyperb1iss/hyperskills --skill orchestrate
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/hyperb1iss/hyperskills --skill orchestrate

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。

orchestrate 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息。适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中根据任务场景快速定位候选结果。通过 npx skills add 命令从 hyperb1iss/hyperskills 仓库安装。安装前需确认权限范围和维护状态,避免触发联网或命令执行。

建议结合原始 README 了解具体编排逻辑和输出格式。

来源仓库内路径:skills/orchestrate

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/hyperb1iss/hyperskills --skill orchestrate;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

    它需要调用外部服务,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

orchestrate 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/hyperb1iss/hyperskills --skill orchestrate。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

orchestrate 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。

orchestrate 需要什么权限?

权限级别是调用外部服务。该 Skill 可能调用第三方服务、云服务或外部模型 API,使用前需要确认账号、额度、数据发送范围和服务条款。

orchestrate 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。

orchestrate 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 13,259 次,近一周安装 547 次,下载 4,332 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。

orchestrate 安全吗?

第三方扫描有提醒项,说明存在需要人工确认的行为。安装前请打开源码看清它读了什么、联网到哪里。

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。

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。
  • 第三方扫描存在提醒项或未通过项,需要人工逐条确认。
  • 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。

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
orchestrate

orchestrate 搜索 · 本页

13,2596调用外部服务未明确有提醒

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

Multi-Agent Orchestration

Meta-orchestration patterns mined from 597+ real agent dispatches across production codebases. This skill tells you WHICH strategy to use, HOW to structure prompts, and WHEN to use background vs foreground.

Core principle: Choose the right orchestration strategy for the work, partition agents by independence, inject context to enable parallelism, and adapt review overhead to trust level.

Strategy Selection

digraph strategy_selection {
    rankdir=TB;
    "What type of work?" [shape=diamond];

    "Research / knowledge gathering" [shape=box];
    "Independent feature builds" [shape=box];
    "Sequential dependent tasks" [shape=box];
    "Same transformation across partitions" [shape=box];
    "Codebase audit / assessment" [shape=box];
    "Greenfield project kickoff" [shape=box];

    "Research Swarm" [shape=box style=filled fillcolor=lightyellow];
    "Epic Parallel Build" [shape=box style=filled fillcolor=lightyellow];
    "Sequential Pipeline" [shape=box style=filled fillcolor=lightyellow];
    "Parallel Sweep" [shape=box style=filled fillcolor=lightyellow];
    "Multi-Dimensional Audit" [shape=box style=filled fillcolor=lightyellow];
    "Full Lifecycle" [shape=box style=filled fillcolor=lightyellow];

    "What type of work?" -> "Research / knowledge gathering";
    "What type of work?" -> "Independent feature builds";
    "What type of work?" -> "Sequential dependent tasks";
    "What type of work?" -> "Same transformation across partitions";
    "What type of work?" -> "Codebase audit / assessment";
    "What type of work?" -> "Greenfield project kickoff";

    "Research / knowledge gathering" -> "Research Swarm";
    "Independent feature builds" -> "Epic Parallel Build";
    "Sequential dependent tasks" -> "Sequential Pipeline";
    "Same transformation across partitions" -> "Parallel Sweep";
    "Codebase audit / assessment" -> "Multi-Dimensional Audit";
    "Greenfield project kickoff" -> "Full Lifecycle";
}
StrategyWhenAgentsBackgroundKey Pattern
Research SwarmKnowledge gathering, docs, SOTA research10-60+Yes (100%)Fan-out, each writes own doc
Epic Parallel BuildPlan with independent epics/features20-60+Yes (90%+)Wave dispatch by subsystem
Sequential PipelineDependent tasks, shared files3-15No (0%)Implement -> Review -> Fix chain
Parallel SweepSame fix/transform across modules4-10No (0%)Partition by directory, fan-out
Multi-Dimensional AuditQuality gates, deep assessment6-9No (0%)Same code, different review lenses
Full LifecycleNew project from scratchAll aboveMixedResearch -> Plan -> Build -> Review -> Harden

Strategy 1: Research Swarm

Mass-deploy background agents to build a knowledge corpus. Each agent researches one topic and writes one markdown document. Zero dependencies between agents.

When to Use

  • Kicking off a new project (need SOTA for all technologies)
  • Building a skill/plugin (need comprehensive domain knowledge)
  • Technology evaluation (compare multiple options in parallel)

The Pattern

Phase 1: Deploy research army (ALL BACKGROUND)
    Wave 1 (10-20 agents): Core technology research
    Wave 2 (10-20 agents): Specialized topics, integrations
    Wave 3 (5-10 agents): Gap-filling based on early results

Phase 2: Monitor and supplement
    - Check completed docs as they arrive
    - Identify gaps, deploy targeted follow-up agents
    - Read completed research to inform remaining dispatches

Phase 3: Synthesize
    - Read all research docs (foreground)
    - Create architecture plans, design docs
    - Use Plan agent to synthesize findings

Prompt Template: Research Agent

Research [TECHNOLOGY] for [PROJECT]'s [USE CASE].

Create a comprehensive research doc at [OUTPUT_PATH]/[filename].md covering:

1. Latest [TECH] version and features (search "[TECH] 2026" or "[TECH] latest")
2. [Specific feature relevant to project]
3. [Another relevant feature]
4. [Integration patterns with other stack components]
5. [Performance characteristics]
6. [Known gotchas and limitations]
7. [Best practices for production use]
8. [Code examples for key patterns]

Include code examples where possible. Use WebSearch and WebFetch to get current docs.

Key rules:

  • Every agent gets an explicit output file path (no ambiguity)
  • Include search hints: "search [TECH] 2026" (agents need recency guidance)
  • Numbered coverage list (8-12 items) scopes the research precisely
  • ALL agents run in background -- no dependencies between research topics

Dispatch Cadence

  • 3-4 seconds between agent dispatches
  • Group into thematic waves of 10-20 agents
  • 15-25 minute gaps between waves for gap analysis

Strategy 2: Epic Parallel Build

Deploy background agents to implement independent features/epics simultaneously. Each agent builds one feature in its own directory/module. No two agents touch the same files.

When to Use

  • Implementation plan with 10+ independent tasks
  • Monorepo with isolated packages/modules
  • Sprint backlog with non-overlapping features

The Pattern

Phase 1: Scout (FOREGROUND)
    - Deploy one Explore agent to map the codebase
    - Identify dependency chains and independent workstreams
    - Group tasks by subsystem to prevent file conflicts

Phase 2: Deploy build army (ALL BACKGROUND)
    Wave 1: Infrastructure/foundation (Redis, DB, auth)
    Wave 2: Backend APIs (each in own module directory)
    Wave 3: Frontend pages (each in own route directory)
    Wave 4: Integrations (MCP servers, external services)
    Wave 5: DevOps (CI, Docker, deployment)
    Wave 6: Bug fixes from review findings

Phase 3: Monitor and coordinate
    - Check git status for completed commits
    - Handle git index.lock contention (expected with 30+ agents)
    - Deploy remaining tasks as agents complete
    - Track via Sibyl tasks or TodoWrite

Phase 4: Review and harden (FOREGROUND)
    - Run `cross-model-review` on completed work
    - Dispatch fix agents for critical findings
    - Integration testing

Prompt Template: Feature Build Agent

**Task: [DESCRIPTIVE TITLE]** (task\_[ID])

Work in /path/to/project/[SPECIFIC_DIRECTORY]

## Context

[What already exists. Reference specific files, patterns, infrastructure.]
[e.g., "Redis is available at `app.state.redis`", "Follow pattern from `src/auth/`"]

## Your Job

1. Create `src/path/to/module/` with:
   - `file.py` -- [Description]
   - `routes.py` -- [Description]
   - `models.py` -- [Schema definitions]

2. Implementation requirements:
   [Detailed spec with code snippets, Pydantic models, API contracts]

3. Tests:
   - Create `tests/test_module.py`
   - Cover: [specific test scenarios]

4. Integration:
   - Wire into [main app entry point]
   - Register routes at [path]

## Git

Commit with message: "feat([module]): [description]"
Only stage files YOU created. Check `git status` before committing.
Do NOT stage files from other agents.

Key rules:

  • Every agent gets its own directory scope -- NO OVERLAP
  • Provide existing patterns to follow ("Follow pattern from X")
  • Include infrastructure context ("Redis available at X")
  • Explicit git hygiene instructions (critical with 30+ parallel agents)
  • Task IDs for traceability

Git Coordination for Parallel Agents

When running 10+ agents concurrently:

  1. Expect index.lock contention -- agents will retry automatically
  2. Each agent commits only its own files -- prompt must say this explicitly
  3. No agent should run git add. -- only specific files
  4. Monitor with git log --oneline -20 periodically
  5. No agent should push -- orchestrator handles push after integration

Strategy 3: Sequential Pipeline

Execute dependent tasks one at a time with review gates. Each task builds on the previous task's output.

When to Use

  • Tasks that modify shared files
  • Integration boundary work (JNI bridges, auth chains)
  • Review-then-fix cycles where each fix depends on review findings
  • Complex features where implementation order matters

The Pattern

For each task:
    1. Dispatch implementer (FOREGROUND)
    2. Dispatch spec reviewer (FOREGROUND)
    3. Dispatch code quality reviewer (FOREGROUND)
    4. Fix any issues found
    5. Move to next task

Trust Gradient (adapt over time):
    Early tasks:  Implement -> Spec Review -> Code Review (full ceremony)
    Middle tasks: Implement -> Spec Review (lighter)
    Late tasks:   Implement only (pattern proven, high confidence)

Trust Gradient

As the session progresses and patterns prove reliable, progressively lighten review overhead:

PhaseReview OverheadWhen
Full ceremonyImplement + Spec Review + Code ReviewFirst 3-4 tasks
StandardImplement + Spec ReviewTasks 5-8, or after patterns stabilize
LightImplement + quick spot-checkLate tasks with established patterns
Cost-optimizedUse the host's configured fast reviewerFormulaic review passes

This is NOT cutting corners -- it's earned confidence. If a late task deviates from the pattern, escalate back to full ceremony.


Strategy 4: Parallel Sweep

Apply the same transformation across partitioned areas of the codebase. Every agent does the same TYPE of work but on different FILES.

When to Use

  • Lint/format fixes across modules
  • Type annotation additions across packages
  • Test writing for multiple modules
  • Documentation updates across components
  • UI polish across pages

The Pattern

Phase 1: Analyze the scope
    - Run the tool (ruff, ty, etc.) to get full issue list
    - Auto-fix what you can
    - Group remaining issues by module/directory

Phase 2: Fan-out fix agents (4-10 agents)
    - One agent per module/directory
    - Each gets: issue count by category, domain-specific guidance
    - All foreground (need to verify each completes)

Phase 3: Verify and repeat
    - Run the tool again to check remaining issues
    - If issues remain, dispatch another wave
    - Repeat until clean

Prompt Template: Module Fix Agent

Fix all [TOOL] issues in the [MODULE_NAME] directory ([PATH]).

Current issues ([COUNT] total):

- [RULE_CODE]: [description] ([count]) -- [domain-specific fix guidance]
- [RULE_CODE]: [description] ([count]) -- [domain-specific fix guidance]

Run `[TOOL_COMMAND] [PATH]` to see exact issues.

IMPORTANT for [DOMAIN] code:
[Domain-specific guidance, e.g., "GTK imports need GI.require_version() before gi.repository imports"]

After fixing, run `[TOOL_COMMAND] [PATH]` to verify zero issues remain.

Key rules:

  • Provide issue counts by category (not just "fix everything")
  • Include domain-specific guidance (agents need to know WHY patterns exist)
  • Partition by directory to prevent overlap
  • Run in waves: fix -> verify -> fix remaining -> verify

Strategy 5: Multi-Dimensional Audit

Deploy multiple reviewers to examine the same code from different angles simultaneously. Each reviewer has a different focus lens.

When to Use

  • Major feature complete, need comprehensive review
  • Pre-release quality gate
  • Security audit
  • Performance assessment

The Pattern

Dispatch 6 parallel reviewers (ALL FOREGROUND):
    1. Code quality & safety reviewer
    2. Integration correctness reviewer
    3. Spec completeness reviewer
    4. Test coverage reviewer
    5. Performance analyst
    6. Security auditor

Wait for all to complete, then:
    - Synthesize findings into prioritized action list
    - Dispatch targeted fix agents for critical issues
    - Re-review only the dimensions that had findings

Prompt Template: Dimension Reviewer

[DIMENSION] review of [COMPONENT] implementation.

**Files to review:**

- [file1.ext]
- [file2.ext]
- [file3.ext]

**Analyze:**

1. [Specific question for this dimension]
2. [Specific question for this dimension]
3. [Specific question for this dimension]

**Report format:**

- Findings: numbered list with severity (Critical/Important/Minor)
- Assessment: Approved / Needs Changes
- Recommendations: prioritized action items

Strategy 6: Full Lifecycle

For greenfield projects, combine all strategies in sequence:

Session 1: RESEARCH (Research Swarm)
    -> 30-60 background agents build knowledge corpus
    -> Architecture planning agents synthesize findings
    -> Output: docs/research/*.md + docs/plans/*.md

Session 2: BUILD (Epic Parallel Build)
    -> Scout agent maps what exists
    -> 30-60 background agents build features by epic
    -> Monitor, handle git contention, track completions
    -> Output: working codebase with commits

Session 3: ITERATE (Build-Review-Fix Pipeline)
    -> Code review agents assess work
    -> Fix agents address findings
    -> Deep audit agents (foreground) assess each subsystem
    -> Output: quality-assessed codebase

Session 4: HARDEN (Sequential Pipeline)
    -> Integration boundary reviews (foreground, sequential)
    -> Security fixes, race condition fixes
    -> Test infrastructure setup
    -> Output: production-ready codebase

Session 5: CONSOLIDATE (Dream)
    -> Capture durable patterns, gotchas, and architecture decisions
    -> Link learnings back to project context in Sibyl
    -> Output: updated knowledge graph for future sessions

Each session shifts orchestration strategy to match the work's nature. Parallel when possible, sequential when required.


Background vs Foreground Decision

digraph bg_fg {
    "What is the agent producing?" [shape=diamond];

    "Information (research, docs)" [shape=box];
    "Code modifications" [shape=box];

    "Does orchestrator need it NOW?" [shape=diamond];
    "BACKGROUND" [shape=box style=filled fillcolor=lightgreen];
    "FOREGROUND" [shape=box style=filled fillcolor=lightyellow];

    "Does next task depend on this task's files?" [shape=diamond];
    "FOREGROUND (sequential)" [shape=box style=filled fillcolor=lightyellow];
    "FOREGROUND (parallel)" [shape=box style=filled fillcolor=lightyellow];

    "What is the agent producing?" -> "Information (research, docs)";
    "What is the agent producing?" -> "Code modifications";

    "Information (research, docs)" -> "Does orchestrator need it NOW?";
    "Does orchestrator need it NOW?" -> "FOREGROUND" [label="yes"];
    "Does orchestrator need it NOW?" -> "BACKGROUND" [label="no - synthesize later"];

    "Code modifications" -> "Does next task depend on this task's files?";
    "Does next task depend on this task's files?" -> "FOREGROUND (sequential)" [label="yes"];
    "Does next task depend on this task's files?" -> "FOREGROUND (parallel)" [label="no - different modules"];
}

Rules observed from 597+ dispatches:

  • Research agents with no immediate dependency -> BACKGROUND (100% of the time)
  • Code-writing agents -> FOREGROUND (even if parallel)
  • Review/validation gates -> FOREGROUND (blocks pipeline)
  • Sequential dependencies -> FOREGROUND, one at a time

Prompt Engineering Patterns

Pattern A: Role + Mission + Structure (Research)

You are researching [DOMAIN] to create comprehensive documentation for [PROJECT].

Your mission: Create an exhaustive reference document covering ALL [TOPIC] capabilities.

Cover these areas in depth:

1. **[Category]** -- specific items
2. **[Category]** -- specific items
   ...

Use WebSearch and WebFetch to find blog posts, GitHub repos, and official docs.

Pattern B: Task + Context + Files + Spec (Feature Build)

**Task: [TITLE]** (task\_[ID])

Work in /absolute/path/to/[directory]

## Context

[What exists, what to read, what infrastructure is available]

## Your Job

1. Create `path/to/file` with [description]
2. [Detailed implementation spec]
3. [Test requirements]
4. [Integration requirements]

## Git

Commit with: "feat([scope]): [message]"
Only stage YOUR files.

Pattern C: Review + Verify + Report (Audit)

Comprehensive audit of [SCOPE] for [DIMENSION].

Look for:

1. [Specific thing #1]
2. [Specific thing #2]
   ...
3. [Specific thing #10]

[Scope boundaries -- which directories/files]

Report format:

- Findings: numbered with severity
- Assessment: Pass / Needs Work
- Action items: prioritized

Pattern D: Issue + Location + Fix (Bug Fix)

**Task:** Fix [ISSUE] -- [SEVERITY]

**Problem:** [Description with file:line references]
**Location:** [Exact file path]

**Fix Required:**

1. [Specific change]
2. [Specific change]

**Verify:**

1. Run [command] to confirm fix
2. Run tests: [test command]

Context Injection: The Parallelism Enabler

Agents can work independently BECAUSE the orchestrator pre-loads them with all context they need. Without this, agents would need to explore first, serializing the work.

Always inject:

  • Absolute file paths (never relative)
  • Existing patterns to follow ("Follow pattern from src/auth/jwt.py")
  • Available infrastructure ("Redis at app.state.redis")
  • Design language/conventions ("SilkCircuit Neon palette")
  • Tool usage hints ("Use WebSearch to find...")
  • Git instructions ("Only stage YOUR files")

For parallel agents, duplicate shared context:

  • Copy the same context block into each agent's prompt
  • Explicit exclusion notes ("11-Sibyl is handled by another agent")
  • Shared utilities described identically

Monitoring Parallel Agents

When running 10+ background agents:

  1. Check periodically -- git log --oneline -20 for commits
  2. Read output files -- tail the agent output files for progress
  3. Track completions -- Use Sibyl tasks or TodoWrite
  4. Deploy gap-fillers -- As early agents complete, identify missing work
  5. Handle contention -- git index.lock is expected, agents retry automatically

Status Report Template

## Agent Swarm Status

**[N] agents deployed** | **[M] completed** | **[P] in progress**

### Completed:
- [Agent description] -- [Key result]
- [Agent description] -- [Key result]

### In Progress:
- [Agent description] -- [Status]

### Gaps Identified:
- [Missing area] -- deploying follow-up agent

Anti-Patterns

Anti-PatternFix
Dispatch agents that touch the same filesPartition by directory/module; one owner per scope
Run independent research agents foregroundBackground research; synthesize after completion
Send 50 agents with "fix everything" promptsGive each agent a specific scope, issue list, and done signal
Skip the scout phase for build sprintsExplore first to map dependencies and file ownership
Keep full review ceremony for every late taskApply the trust gradient after patterns prove stable
Let agents run git add. or git pushExplicit git hygiene in every build prompt
Dispatch background agents for integration codeBackground is for research; coordinate code changes

Hyperskills Integration

SkillUse WithWhen
brainstormFull LifecycleBefore research when the direction is open
researchResearch SwarmKnowledge gathering before decisions
planEpic Parallel BuildConvert scope into dependency-safe waves
implementAll build strategiesExecution loop and verification cadence
cross-model-reviewAll strategiesIndependent quality gate after integration
securityMulti-Dimensional AuditSecurity review lens
gitEpic Parallel BuildMulti-agent staging, rebases, recovery
dreamFull LifecycleCapture durable learnings after large runs

What This Skill is NOT

  • Not permission to spawn agents when the host environment forbids it.
  • Not a replacement for planning; orchestration executes a task graph.
  • Not useful for tiny changes that one agent can finish faster directly.
  • Not a way around file ownership; overlapping edits still need sequencing.

平台分布

Codex

38.92%
按下载量换算1,686

Claude

29.09%
按下载量换算1,260

Cursor

19.06%
按下载量换算826

Gemini CLI

10.15%
按下载量换算440

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

可疑

权限和风险

调用外部服务

该 Skill 可能调用第三方服务、云服务或外部模型 API,使用前需要确认账号、额度、数据发送范围和服务条款。

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。来源安全扫描存在提醒或未通过项,安装前请自行复核。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