Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

implement-phases(实施阶段)

implement-phases 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。

implement-phases 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,权限为接触敏感数据;许可证为 MIT,暂无第三方扫描结果,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 53,604。

总安装 528周安装 22GitHub Stars 公开资料未说明下载 176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

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:implement-phases(实施阶段)
来源仓库:https://github.com/charlesjones-dev/claude-code-plugins-dev
仓库路径:skills/implement-phases
安装命令:
npx skills add charlesjones-dev/claude-code-plugins-dev --skill "implement-phases"
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。

AgentSkills.tonpx skills
npx skills add charlesjones-dev/claude-code-plugins-dev --skill "implement-phases"

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。

用于查找和筛选相关信息。implement-phases 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor 和 Gemini CLI 中使用。提供基础的信息检索功能。使用时需确认具体应用场景和关键词设置。

安装方式:通过 github 使用 npx skills add 命令安装。

来源仓库内路径:skills/implement-phases

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 charlesjones-dev/claude-code-plugins-dev --skill "implement-phase…;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

    它需要接触敏感数据,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

implement-phases 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add charlesjones-dev/claude-code-plugins-dev --skill "implement-phases"。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

implement-phases 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。

implement-phases 需要什么权限?

权限级别是接触敏感数据。该 Skill 可能接触密钥、Token、环境变量或敏感配置,应进入高风险复核队列,默认不自动发布。

implement-phases 是免费的吗?

来源标注的许可证是 MIT。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。

implement-phases 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 528 次,近一周安装 22 次,下载 176 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。

implement-phases 安全吗?

没有查到第三方扫描结果,安全性无法从公开资料判断,安装前请自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。

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。
  • 许可证明确为 MIT,商用和分发边界好判断。

先想清楚的地方

  • 需要接触敏感数据,装到常用环境前要先评估影响面。
  • 没有第三方扫描结果,安全性只能靠自己读源码判断。
  • 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

  • 环境里有大量密钥、凭证,不方便给第三方 Skill 读取的人。
  • 要求有安全扫描结论才肯安装的团队。
  • 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
implement-phases

实施阶段 · 本页

528—接触敏感数据MIT未收录

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
implement-phases
description
Use when implementing phases from a plan document, executing phased implementations, orchestrating sub-agents for phase work, or when /workflow-implement-phases command is invoked. Provides dependency analysis and parallel/sequential execution strategies.

Phase Implementation Orchestration Skill

This skill provides the methodology for analyzing plan documents, determining optimal execution strategies, and coordinating phase implementation through sub-agents.

Overview

When implementing phases from a plan document, the orchestrator must:

  1. Extract and understand each phase's scope
  2. Detect dependencies (explicit and implicit)
  3. Choose optimal execution strategy
  4. Coordinate sub-agents for implementation
  5. Handle failures gracefully
  6. Aggregate and report results

CRITICAL: Mandatory Sub-Agent Requirement

YOU MUST USE THE TASK TOOL TO SPAWN A SUB-AGENT FOR EVERY PHASE IMPLEMENTATION.

This is a non-negotiable requirement. The orchestrator (main agent) is ONLY responsible for:

  • Reading and parsing the plan document
  • Analyzing dependencies
  • Determining execution strategy
  • Presenting the plan to the user
  • Spawning Task() sub-agents for each phase
  • Aggregating results after sub-agents complete

The orchestrator MUST NOT:

  • Implement any phase directly in the main conversation
  • Write code, create files, or make changes for any phase
  • Skip sub-agent spawning for "simple" phases
  • Combine multiple phases into a single implementation

Why this matters:

  • Context isolation: Each sub-agent has fresh context, preventing saturation
  • Parallelization: Independent phases can run in parallel via multiple Task() calls
  • Failure isolation: A failed phase doesn't corrupt the main agent's state
  • Results tracking: Sub-agents write structured results to coordination directory

Correct pattern:

# For each phase (or group of parallel phases), spawn Task() sub-agents
Task(
  subagent_type="general-purpose",
  prompt="[Phase implementation prompt with full spec and acceptance criteria]",
  description="Implement phase-1: [name]"
)

WRONG pattern (never do this):

# Never implement phases directly
Edit(file_path="src/feature.ts", ...)  # WRONG - orchestrator should not edit files
Write(file_path="src/new-file.ts", ...)  # WRONG - orchestrator should not create files

Step 1: Parse the Plan Document

Extract from the plan file:

phases = [
  {
    id: "phase-1",
    name: "Human-readable name",
    spec: "Full specification text",
    acceptance_criteria: ["criterion 1", "criterion 2"],
    explicit_dependencies: ["phase-0"]  // if stated
  },
  ...
]

Parsing Heuristics

Look for phase definitions in these formats:

  • ## Phase 1:, ### Phase 1 -, **Phase 1**
  • # Step 1, ## Step 1:
  • Numbered sections: 1., 1), (1)
  • YAML frontmatter with phase definitions

Extract acceptance criteria from:

  • Bullet points under "Acceptance Criteria", "Done when", "Requirements"
  • Checkboxes: - [ ] criterion
  • "Must have", "Should", "Will" statements

Step 2: Dependency Analysis

Explicit Dependencies (Highest Confidence)

Patterns that indicate explicit ordering:

  • "Phase 2 requires Phase 1"
  • "After completing X, proceed to Y"
  • "Once X is done, Y can begin"
  • "Depends on:", "Prerequisites:", "Requires:"
  • "Do not start until X is complete"

Implicit Dependencies (Analyze Code Paths)

Data/Schema Dependencies

DEPENDENT if Phase B:
- References database tables created in Phase A
- Uses migrations from Phase A
- Queries data that Phase A populates

API/Interface Dependencies

DEPENDENT if Phase B:
- Calls endpoints defined in Phase A
- Imports services/modules created in Phase A
- Uses types/interfaces exported by Phase A

File Dependencies

DEPENDENT if Phase B:
- Modifies files created in Phase A
- Extends classes defined in Phase A
- Imports from paths that Phase A creates

Configuration Dependencies

DEPENDENT if Phase B:
- Requires environment variables Phase A documents
- Uses config keys Phase A introduces
- Needs secrets/credentials Phase A sets up

Build Dependencies

DEPENDENT if Phase B:
- Requires compiled output from Phase A
- Uses generated code from Phase A
- Needs artifacts (bundles, images) from Phase A

Independence Indicators (Safe to Parallelize)

High confidence parallel candidates:

  • Phases operate on completely separate directories
  • Phases add isolated features (no shared imports)
  • Phases are orthogonal concerns (logging vs caching vs monitoring)
  • Plan explicitly states "can be done in any order"
  • Phases are different layers (frontend vs backend vs infra)

Dependency Detection Algorithm

for each phase_b in phases:
  for each phase_a in phases where phase_a != phase_b:

    # Check explicit
    if phase_b.spec mentions phase_a.id as dependency:
      add_dependency(phase_b, phase_a, confidence=HIGH)

    # Check implicit - file paths
    files_created_by_a = extract_file_paths(phase_a.spec)
    files_referenced_by_b = extract_file_paths(phase_b.spec)
    if intersection(files_created_by_a, files_referenced_by_b):
      add_dependency(phase_b, phase_a, confidence=MEDIUM)

    # Check implicit - imports/types
    exports_from_a = extract_exports(phase_a.spec)
    imports_in_b = extract_imports(phase_b.spec)
    if intersection(exports_from_a, imports_in_b):
      add_dependency(phase_b, phase_a, confidence=MEDIUM)

    # Check implicit - keywords
    if phase_b.spec contains "after {phase_a.name}":
      add_dependency(phase_b, phase_a, confidence=HIGH)
    if phase_b.spec contains "using {artifact from phase_a}":
      add_dependency(phase_b, phase_a, confidence=MEDIUM)

Step 3: Build Execution Graph

Strategy Selection

PARALLEL - All phases run simultaneously:

Conditions:
- No dependencies between any phases
- Phases operate on isolated code paths
- No shared files being modified
- Low risk of merge conflicts

Benefits:
- Fastest total execution time
- Maximum context isolation

Risks:
- Potential merge conflicts if analysis missed shared files

SEQUENTIAL - Phases run one after another:

Conditions:
- Linear dependency chain exists
- Each phase depends on previous
- Shared state or files across phases
- High integration complexity

Benefits:
- Safest execution
- Each phase has full context from prior phases
- Easier debugging

Risks:
- Slowest execution
- Context may still accumulate if not managed

MIXED - Parallel groups with sequential ordering between groups:

Conditions:
- Some phases are independent (parallel within group)
- Some phases have dependencies (sequential between groups)

Algorithm:
1. Build dependency graph
2. Topologically sort into levels
3. Phases at same level (no dependencies on each other) run parallel
4. Wait for level to complete before starting next level

Example:
  Level 0: [phase-1, phase-3]     # No dependencies, run parallel
  Level 1: [phase-2]              # Depends on phase-1
  Level 2: [phase-4, phase-5]     # Both depend on phase-2

Execution Plan Template

Present to user before executing:

## Phase Execution Plan

### Phases Analyzed
| Phase | Description | Dependencies | Level |
|-------|-------------|--------------|-------|
| phase-1 | Create user model | None | 0 |
| phase-3 | Add logging | None | 0 |
| phase-2 | Authentication | phase-1 | 1 |
| phase-4 | User API | phase-2 | 2 |
| phase-5 | Admin API | phase-2 | 2 |

### Execution Strategy: **MIXED**

Level 0 (parallel): phase-1 -+- phase-3 | Level 1 (sequential): phase-2 <+ | Level 2 (parallel): phase-4 -+- phase-5


### Dependency Reasoning
- phase-1 <-> phase-3: Independent (separate directories)
- phase-2 -> phase-1: Uses User model (import dependency)
- phase-4 -> phase-2: Uses auth middleware (API dependency)
- phase-5 -> phase-2: Uses auth middleware (API dependency)
- phase-4 <-> phase-5: Independent (separate route files)

### Estimated Execution
- 3 sub-agent cycles (parallel reduces from 5 sequential)

Proceed? [Y/n/modify]

Step 4: Execute Phases

REMINDER: You MUST use Task() sub-agents for ALL phase implementations. Never implement directly.

Coordination Setup

mkdir -p .claude/phase-coordination/{artifacts,results}

Sub-Agent Prompt Template

When spawning Task() for each phase (REQUIRED for every phase):

## Phase Implementation Task

**Phase ID**: {phase_id}
**Phase Name**: {phase_name}

### Specification
{full_phase_spec}

### Acceptance Criteria
{acceptance_criteria_list}

### Context from Prior Phases
{if sequential or mixed, include summary from dependency phases}

Read artifacts from: `.claude/phase-coordination/artifacts/`
Write your artifacts to: `.claude/phase-coordination/artifacts/{phase_id}/`

### Required Outputs

1. **Implement the phase** according to specification

2. **Create results file** at `.claude/phase-coordination/results/{phase_id}.md`:

{phase_id} Results

Summary

[2-3 sentences on what was implemented]

Files Changed

  • path/to/file - [description]

Key Decisions

  • [Decision]: [Rationale]

Interfaces Exposed

[Types, functions, or contracts for downstream phases]

Deviations

[Any deviations from spec with justification]

Verification

[How to verify this phase works]


3. **Export any shared artifacts** (types, interfaces, schemas) to the artifacts directory

### Quality Standards
- No placeholder code or TODOs
- Match existing project conventions
- Handle errors appropriately
- Include inline documentation for complex logic

Parallel Execution Pattern

Use multiple Task() calls in a SINGLE message to execute phases in parallel:

# Spawn all phases in current level simultaneously using multiple Task() calls in ONE message
# This is the ONLY way to achieve true parallelization

# In your response, include ALL of these Task() calls together:
Task(
  subagent_type="general-purpose",
  prompt=build_phase_prompt(phase_1),
  description="Implement phase-1: [name]"
)
Task(
  subagent_type="general-purpose",
  prompt=build_phase_prompt(phase_2),
  description="Implement phase-2: [name]"
)
Task(
  subagent_type="general-purpose",
  prompt=build_phase_prompt(phase_3),
  description="Implement phase-3: [name]"
)

# All tasks run in parallel when called in the same message
# Wait for all to complete
# Collect results from .claude/phase-coordination/results/

Sequential Execution Pattern

Each phase STILL requires its own Task() sub-agent, just called one at a time:

for phase in topologically_sorted_phases:
  # Build context from dependencies
  dependency_context = ""
  for dep in phase.dependencies:
    dep_results = read(f".claude/phase-coordination/results/{dep.id}.md")
    dependency_context += f"\n### Context from {dep.id}\n{dep_results}"

  # Execute with dependency context - MUST use Task(), never implement directly
  Task(
    subagent_type="general-purpose",
    prompt=build_phase_prompt(phase, dependency_context),
    description="Implement {phase.id}: {phase.name}"
  )

  # Wait for sub-agent to complete
  # Verify results before proceeding to next phase
  verify_phase_results(phase)

Step 5: Error Handling

Phase Failure

If a phase fails:
1. Capture error output and partial results
2. Mark phase as FAILED in coordination directory
3. Check dependency graph:
   - SKIP all phases that depend on failed phase
   - CONTINUE with independent phases
4. Report failure clearly in final summary

Dependency Conflict

If sub-agent reports unexpected dependency:
1. Pause execution
2. Present conflict to user
3. Options:
   a. Re-analyze with new information
   b. Force continue (user accepts risk)
   c. Abort and revise plan

Uncertain Dependencies

When confidence is low:
1. Default to sequential (safer)
2. Flag uncertainty in execution plan
3. Ask user to confirm before proceeding

Step 6: Results Aggregation

Final Summary Template

## Implementation Complete

### Execution Summary
| Phase | Status | Files | Duration |
|-------|--------|-------|----------|
| phase-1 | Done | 3 | ~1 cycle |
| phase-3 | Done | 1 | ~1 cycle |
| phase-2 | Done | 4 | ~1 cycle |
| phase-4 | Done | 2 | ~1 cycle |
| phase-5 | Partial | 1 | ~1 cycle |

### Strategy Used
Mixed parallel/sequential across 3 levels

### All Files Modified
- `src/models/user.ts` (phase-1)
- `src/middleware/logging.ts` (phase-3)
- `src/middleware/auth.ts` (phase-2)
- `src/routes/users.ts` (phase-4)
- `src/routes/admin.ts` (phase-5, incomplete)

### Key Decisions Across Phases
[Aggregated from phase results]

### Integration Points to Verify
- [ ] User model imports correctly in auth
- [ ] Auth middleware registered in app
- [ ] Logging captures auth events

### Issues Encountered
- phase-5: Admin role enum not defined, implemented basic version

### Recommended Next Steps
1. Run test suite: `npm test`
2. Manually verify integration points
3. Review phase-5 partial implementation
4. Address any flagged deviations

### Artifacts Location
Full details: `.claude/phase-coordination/results/`
Shared artifacts: `.claude/phase-coordination/artifacts/`

Cleanup

After user confirms completion:

# Option to preserve for debugging
mv .claude/phase-coordination .claude/phase-coordination-{timestamp}

# Or clean up
rm -rf .claude/phase-coordination

Recommend user run /compact after completion since detailed context is persisted to files.

平台分布

OpenCode

28.86%
按下载量换算51

Claude Code

20.33%
按下载量换算36

windsurf

19.62%
按下载量换算35

trae

12.57%
按下载量换算22

Codex

7.41%
按下载量换算13

Antigravity

3.34%
按下载量换算6

安全审计

暂无安全审计结果可展示。

权限和风险

接触敏感数据

该 Skill 可能接触密钥、Token、环境变量或敏感配置,应进入高风险复核队列,默认不自动发布。

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