Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

langgraph-routing(语言图路由)

langgraph-routing 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。

langgraph-routing 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;许可证为 MIT,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 59,221。

总安装 392周安装 16GitHub Stars 160下载 125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:langgraph-routing(语言图路由)
来源仓库:https://github.com/yonatangross/orchestkit
仓库路径:skills/langgraph-routing
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/yonatangross/orchestkit --skill langgraph-routing
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。不同来源提供的安装方式可能略有差异;本站展示可直接复制的安装命令,安装前请核对来源页面。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/yonatangross/orchestkit --skill langgraph-routing

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、检索和筛选相关信息,支持关键词和任务场景快速定位结果。适合在需要围绕仓库状态、代码变更或协作事项进行整理时使用。可结合来源仓库和原始 README 核验具体用法。

安装命令:npx skills add https://github.com/yonatangross/orchestkit --skill langgraph-routing。安装前建议确认权限范围和维护状态,避免触发不必要操作。

来源仓库内路径:skills/langgraph-routing

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/yonatangross/orchestkit --skill langgraph-rout…;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

langgraph-routing 怎么安装?

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

langgraph-routing 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。

langgraph-routing 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。

langgraph-routing 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。

langgraph-routing 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 392 次,近一周安装 16 次,下载 125 次,GitHub 160 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。

langgraph-routing 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。
  • 3 个目录同时收录,说明这个 Skill 流传比较广。
  • 许可证明确为 MIT,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 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。
  • 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
langgraph-routing

语言图路由 · 本页

392160只读MIT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

LangGraph Conditional Routing

Route workflow execution dynamically based on state.

Basic Conditional Edge

from langgraph.graph import StateGraph, END

def route_based_on_quality(state: WorkflowState) -> str:
    """Decide next step based on quality score."""
    if state["quality_score"] >= 0.8:
        return "publish"
    elif state["retry_count"] < 3:
        return "retry"
    else:
        return "manual_review"

workflow.add_conditional_edges(
    "quality_check",
    route_based_on_quality,
    {
        "publish": "publish_node",
        "retry": "generator",
        "manual_review": "review_queue"
    }
)

Quality Gate Pattern

def route_after_quality_gate(state: AnalysisState) -> str:
    """Route based on quality gate result."""
    if state["quality_passed"]:
        return "compress_findings"
    elif state["retry_count"] < 2:
        return "supervisor"  # Retry
    else:
        return END  # Return partial results

workflow.add_conditional_edges(
    "quality_gate",
    route_after_quality_gate,
    {
        "compress_findings": "compress_findings",
        "supervisor": "supervisor",
        END: END
    }
)

Retry Loop Pattern

def llm_call_with_retry(state):
    """Retry failed LLM calls."""
    try:
        result = call_llm(state["input"])
        state["output"] = result
        state["retry_count"] = 0
        return state
    except Exception as e:
        state["retry_count"] += 1
        state["error"] = str(e)
        return state

def should_retry(state) -> str:
    if state.get("output"):
        return "success"
    elif state["retry_count"] < 3:
        return "retry"
    else:
        return "failed"

workflow.add_conditional_edges(
    "llm_call",
    should_retry,
    {
        "success": "next_step",
        "retry": "llm_call",  # Loop back
        "failed": "error_handler"
    }
)

Routing Patterns

Sequential:    A → B → C              (simple edges)
Branching:     A → (B or C)           (conditional edges)
Looping:       A → B → A              (retry logic)
Convergence:   (A or B) → C           (multiple inputs)
Diamond:       A → (B, C) → D         (parallel then merge)

State-Based Router

def dynamic_router(state: WorkflowState) -> str:
    """Route based on multiple state conditions."""
    if state.get("error"):
        return "error_handler"
    if not state.get("validated"):
        return "validator"
    if state["confidence"] < 0.5:
        return "enhance"
    return "finalize"

Command vs Conditional Edges (2026 Best Practice)

from langgraph.types import Command
from typing import Literal

# Use CONDITIONAL EDGES when: Pure routing, no state updates
def simple_router(state: WorkflowState) -> str:
    if state["score"] > 0.8:
        return "approve"
    return "reject"

workflow.add_conditional_edges("evaluate", simple_router)

# Use COMMAND when: Updating state AND routing together
def router_with_state(state: WorkflowState) -> Command[Literal["approve", "reject"]]:
    if state["score"] > 0.8:
        return Command(
            update={"route_reason": "high score", "routed_at": time.time()},
            goto="approve"
        )
    return Command(
        update={"route_reason": "low score", "routed_at": time.time()},
        goto="reject"
    )

workflow.add_node("evaluate", router_with_state)
# No conditional edges needed - Command handles routing

Semantic Routing Implementation

from sentence_transformers import SentenceTransformer
import numpy as np

embedder = SentenceTransformer("all-MiniLM-L6-v2")

# Pre-compute route embeddings
ROUTE_EMBEDDINGS = {
    "technical": embedder.encode("technical implementation code programming engineering"),
    "business": embedder.encode("business strategy revenue customers sales marketing"),
    "support": embedder.encode("help troubleshoot error problem fix support issue"),
    "creative": embedder.encode("design creative writing content marketing copy"),
}

def semantic_router(state: WorkflowState) -> str:
    """Route based on semantic similarity."""
    query = state["query"]
    query_embedding = embedder.encode(query)

    # Calculate cosine similarities
    similarities = {}
    for route, route_embedding in ROUTE_EMBEDDINGS.items():
        similarity = np.dot(query_embedding, route_embedding) / (
            np.linalg.norm(query_embedding) * np.linalg.norm(route_embedding)
        )
        similarities[route] = similarity

    # Return highest similarity route
    best_route = max(similarities, key=similarities.get)

    # Optional: threshold check
    if similarities[best_route] < 0.3:
        return "general"  # Fallback

    return best_route

workflow.add_conditional_edges(
    "classifier",
    semantic_router,
    {
        "technical": "tech_agent",
        "business": "business_agent",
        "support": "support_agent",
        "creative": "creative_agent",
        "general": "general_agent"
    }
)

Key Decisions

DecisionRecommendation
Max retries2-3 for LLM calls
FallbackAlways have END fallback
Routing functionKeep pure (no side effects)
Edge mappingExplicit mapping for clarity
Command vs ConditionalCommand when updating state + routing
Semantic routingPre-compute embeddings, use cosine similarity

Common Mistakes

  • No END fallback (workflow hangs)
  • Infinite loops (no max retry)
  • Side effects in router (hard to debug)
  • Missing edge mappings (runtime error)

Evaluations

See references/evaluations.md for test cases.

Related Skills

  • langgraph-state - State design for routing decisions
  • langgraph-supervisor - Supervisor pattern with dynamic routing
  • langgraph-parallel - Route to parallel branches
  • langgraph-human-in-loop - Route based on human decisions
  • langgraph-tools - Route after tool execution results
  • agent-loops - ReAct loop patterns with conditional routing

Capability Details

conditional-routing

Keywords: conditional, branch, decision, if-else Solves:

  • Route based on conditions
  • Implement branching logic
  • Create decision nodes

semantic-routing

Keywords: semantic, embedding, similarity, intent Solves:

  • Route by semantic similarity
  • Intent-based routing
  • Embedding-based decisions

router-template

Keywords: template, router, semantic, implementation Solves:

  • Semantic router template
  • Production router code
  • Copy-paste implementation

平台分布

Claude Code

27.83%
按下载量换算35

Antigravity

25.82%
按下载量换算32

Codex

18.73%
按下载量换算23

Gemini CLI

12.22%
按下载量换算15

Cursor

7.89%
按下载量换算10

OpenCode

3.6%
按下载量换算5

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。

继续浏览同类 Skills