Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 待分类

legal-simulation-patrick-munro(法律模拟帕特里克·蒙罗)

legal-simulation-patrick-munro 用于处理 GitHub 仓库、Issue、Pull Request 和代码协作信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要围绕仓库状态、代码变更或协作事项进行整理时使用。可结合来源仓库、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。

legal-simulation-patrick-munro 是待分类类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为需要联网;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在待分类类的 11,209 个 Skill 里排第 2,723。

总安装 1,420周安装 61GitHub Stars 302下载 498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:legal-simulation-patrick-munro(法律模拟帕特里克·蒙罗)
来源仓库:https://github.com/lawvable/awesome-legal-skills
仓库路径:skills/legal-simulation-patrick-munro
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/lawvable/awesome-legal-skills --skill legal-simulation-patrick-munro
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/lawvable/awesome-legal-skills --skill legal-simulation-patrick-munro

这个 Skill 是做什么的

这个 Skill 的分类还没最终确定,用法以来源仓库的说明为准。

legal-simulation-patrick-munro 用于处理 GitHub 仓库与协作信息,适合在开发流程中模拟法律场景事项。支持围绕 Issue、PR、分支等协作元素进行信息归纳与任务推进。通过 npx skills add 命令从 GitHub 安装,需确认权限与维护状态。

涉及写入操作时应检查 token 权限,避免越权修改或创建内容。建议参考原始文档了解具体功能边界与使用方式。

来源仓库内路径:skills/legal-simulation-patrick-munro

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/lawvable/awesome-legal-skills --skill legal-si…;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

legal-simulation-patrick-munro 怎么安装?

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

legal-simulation-patrick-munro 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。

legal-simulation-patrick-munro 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。

legal-simulation-patrick-munro 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。

legal-simulation-patrick-munro 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 1,420 次,近一周安装 61 次,下载 498 次,GitHub 302 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。

legal-simulation-patrick-munro 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。

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。
  • 需要处理待分类类任务、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。

待分类类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
infsh-cli

infsh CLI · Codex、Claude

4,374,576382权限未标注未明确未收录
ai-video-generation

AI 视频生成 · Codex、Claude

4,313,376382调用外部服务未明确有提醒
lark-openapi-explorer

云雀 OpenAPI 浏览器 · Codex、Claude

2,064,1209,011需要联网未明确有提醒
lark-workflow-standup-report

Lark 工作流程站立报告 · Codex、Claude

2,041,6328,978需要联网未明确通过
use-my-browser

使用我的浏览器 · Codex、Claude

1,848,49140操作浏览器未明确未通过
legal-simulation-patrick-munro

法律模拟帕特里克·蒙罗 · 本页

1,420302需要联网未明确通过

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

Legal Persona Simulator

Overview

Realistic simulation framework for demonstrating how AI can assist with legal information needs while respecting professional boundaries and data protection principles. Provides detailed personas across multiple legal contexts (tenant law, business law, startups, employment, consumer protection) with progressive complexity scenarios for showcasing AI-assisted legal triage, information gathering, and appropriate escalation to qualified attorneys.

CRITICAL LEGAL DISCLAIMER

THIS SKILL IS FOR DEMONSTRATION AND EDUCATIONAL PURPOSES ONLY. IT DOES NOT PROVIDE LEGAL ADVICE.

IMPORTANT - READ CAREFULLY:

  • This skill simulates interactions to demonstrate AI capabilities in legal contexts
  • Outputs are fictional scenarios for demonstration, training, or educational purposes only
  • This skill does NOT create attorney-client relationships
  • This skill does NOT provide legal advice, opinions, or recommendations on actual legal matters
  • This skill does NOT substitute for consultation with qualified, licensed attorneys
  • Legal rights, obligations, and remedies vary significantly by jurisdiction
  • Only licensed attorneys can provide legal advice for specific situations
  • Reliance on simulated scenarios for actual legal decisions may result in serious harm

Users must:

  • Consult qualified, licensed attorneys for all actual legal matters
  • Never use simulated content as legal advice for real situations
  • Understand that AI cannot replace professional legal judgment
  • Recognize that laws vary by jurisdiction and change over time
  • Seek appropriate legal representation before taking any legal action
  • Verify all legal information independently with qualified counsel

Neither the skill creator nor Claude/Anthropic:

  • Provides legal advice or creates attorney-client relationships
  • Makes any representation about legal rights or obligations
  • Assumes any liability for reliance on simulated scenarios
  • Endorses any specific legal positions or strategies

Data Protection Notice: While this skill demonstrates GDPR-compliant interaction patterns, users collecting actual personal data must implement proper data protection measures under applicable law and consult with qualified privacy/data protection counsel.

When to Use This Skill

Use this skill when you need to:

  • Demonstrate AI capabilities in legal information contexts (presentations, training, proof-of-concepts)
  • Showcase responsible AI-assisted legal triage and intake processes
  • Illustrate GDPR-compliant client interaction patterns for legal services
  • Create realistic scenarios for legal technology demonstrations
  • Train staff on appropriate AI use in legal contexts
  • Develop educational materials about AI in legal services
  • Test AI-powered legal information systems in controlled environments

NOT for: Actual legal consultations, providing legal advice, or replacing qualified legal professionals

Core Capabilities

1. Five Detailed Personas with Legal Contexts

Persona 1: Residential Tenant (Entry-Level Complexity)

Background

  • Name: Sarah Weber
  • Age: 28
  • Occupation: Marketing coordinator
  • Location: Urban apartment, 2-year lease
  • Situation: Landlord refusing to return security deposit after move-out despite clean inspection

Legal Context

  • Residential tenancy law (jurisdiction-dependent)
  • Security deposit regulations
  • Landlord-tenant dispute resolution
  • Small claims court procedures

Complexity Level: Low

  • Clear legal framework with consumer protections
  • Standardized dispute resolution processes
  • Often resolved without litigation
  • Strong tenant protection laws in many jurisdictions

Demonstration Scenarios

  1. Information gathering on security deposit rights
  2. Template demand letter preparation
  3. Small claims court process explanation
  4. Timeline and procedural guidance
  5. Evidence collection recommendations

AI Value Demonstration: Rapid information access, document template generation, procedure explanation, appropriate attorney referral

Persona 2: Small Business Owner (Medium Complexity)

Background

  • Name: Marcus Chen
  • Age: 35
  • Business: Independent café/bakery
  • Employees: 5
  • Situation: Supplier breach of contract (late deliveries causing inventory shortages and lost revenue)

Legal Context

  • Commercial contract law
  • Breach of contract remedies
  • Business damages calculation
  • Supplier relationship management

Complexity Level: Medium

  • Commercial law frameworks apply
  • Negotiation often preferred over litigation
  • Damages calculation requires business analysis
  • Relationship preservation considerations

Demonstration Scenarios

  1. Contract review and breach analysis
  2. Damages calculation frameworks
  3. Negotiation strategy development
  4. Breach notification letter drafting
  5. Alternative dispute resolution options

AI Value Demonstration: Contract analysis, damages estimation, negotiation guidance, escalation path mapping

Persona 3: Startup Founder (High Complexity)

Background

  • Name: Lisa Kowalski
  • Age: 31
  • Company: SaaS startup (15 employees, Series A funding)
  • Situation: Co-founder equity dispute and potential IP ownership conflict

Legal Context

  • Corporate governance
  • Shareholder agreements
  • Intellectual property ownership
  • Equity and vesting disputes
  • Fiduciary duties

Complexity Level: High

  • Complex corporate and IP law intersection
  • Significant financial stakes
  • Multiple legal specializations required
  • Investor and board considerations

Demonstration Scenarios

  1. Corporate governance structure review
  2. Equity vesting and acceleration analysis
  3. IP assignment agreement evaluation
  4. Negotiation frameworks for founder disputes
  5. Mediation vs. litigation analysis

AI Value Demonstration: Multi-jurisdictional analysis, stakeholder impact assessment, resolution option comparison, specialist attorney matching

Persona 4: HR Manager (Medium-High Complexity)

Background

  • Name: Thomas Bauer
  • Age: 42
  • Company: Mid-sized manufacturing company (250 employees)
  • Situation: Employee claiming wrongful termination and discrimination

Legal Context

  • Employment law
  • Discrimination and harassment law
  • Wrongful termination claims
  • Litigation risk assessment
  • Settlement negotiations

Complexity Level: Medium-High

  • Heavily regulated area with significant penalties
  • Evidence gathering and documentation critical
  • Reputational risk alongside legal risk
  • Insurance and settlement considerations

Demonstration Scenarios

  1. Employment law compliance review
  2. Termination documentation analysis
  3. Discrimination claim risk assessment
  4. Settlement framework development
  5. Litigation cost-benefit analysis

AI Value Demonstration: Compliance gap analysis, risk scoring, documentation review, settlement range estimation, employment law specialist referral

Persona 5: Consumer with Defective Product (Entry-Medium Complexity)

Background

  • Name: David Martinez
  • Age: 38
  • Purchase: Defective appliance (€1,200 smart refrigerator)
  • Situation: Manufacturer refusing warranty repair, retailer denying responsibility

Legal Context

  • Consumer protection law
  • Product warranty and guarantee rights
  • Manufacturer vs. retailer liability
  • Regulatory complaint processes

Complexity Level: Entry-Medium

  • Strong consumer protection frameworks in many jurisdictions
  • Clear statutory rights in EU (2-year guarantee)
  • Regulatory authorities available for complaints
  • Usually resolved through administrative channels

Demonstration Scenarios

  1. Consumer rights information (legal guarantee vs. commercial warranty)
  2. Liability allocation (manufacturer vs. retailer)
  3. Regulatory complaint procedures
  4. Escalation strategies
  5. Evidence preservation guidance

AI Value Demonstration: Consumer rights explanation, multi-party liability analysis, regulatory pathway guidance, evidence collection

Enhanced Feature: Persona variation generator - creates modified versions of each persona with different complicating factors (cross-border elements, time limitations, concurrent legal issues, varying jurisdictional frameworks).

2. GDPR-Compliant Interaction Pattern

Demonstrates responsible data handling in legal contexts:

Initial Intake (Minimal Data Collection)

  • Collect only information necessary to understand legal issue
  • Explain purpose of data collection clearly
  • Avoid collecting sensitive data (race, health, political opinions) unless absolutely essential
  • Use anonymization where possible (e.g., "Client A" instead of names in examples)

Data Minimization Demonstration

  • AI asks only relevant questions, skipping unnecessary personal details
  • Redaction of identifying information in document analysis
  • Compartmentalization of sensitive information
  • Time-limited data retention simulation

Transparency and Consent

  • Clear explanation of how information will be used
  • Explicit consent for data processing
  • Rights explanation (access, correction, deletion, portability)
  • Easy withdrawal mechanisms

Security and Confidentiality

  • Discussion of encryption and secure transmission
  • Access controls for sensitive information
  • Breach notification procedures
  • Professional confidentiality obligations

Enhanced Feature: GDPR compliance checklist generator - creates data protection impact assessment frameworks for legal service AI implementations, identifying risks and mitigation measures.

3. Progressive Complexity Scenarios

Each persona includes 3-5 scenarios that increase in complexity:

Level 1: Information Provision

  • AI provides factual legal information
  • Explains general legal principles and procedures
  • Identifies potentially applicable laws and regulations
  • Clarifies terminology and concepts
  • *No legal advice provided, purely informational*

Level 2: Document Analysis

  • AI reviews contracts, leases, or other legal documents
  • Identifies key provisions and potential issues
  • Flags concerning clauses or omissions
  • Suggests questions to ask attorney
  • *Analysis only, not legal advice on what to do*

Level 3: Options Exploration

  • AI presents multiple legal pathways (negotiation, mediation, litigation)
  • Explains pros/cons of each approach
  • Identifies typical timelines and costs
  • Discusses risk factors for each option
  • *Decision-making remains with user and their attorney*

Level 4: Strategy Frameworks

  • AI helps organize evidence and documentation
  • Develops negotiation position frameworks
  • Creates timeline and procedural roadmaps
  • Generates discussion points for attorney consultation
  • *Frameworks only, implementation requires attorney*

Level 5: Attorney Matching and Referral

  • AI identifies type of legal specialist needed
  • Explains what to look for in attorney selection
  • Suggests questions to ask during initial consultation
  • Discusses fee structures and engagement models
  • *Clear transition to human professional required*

Enhanced Feature: Complexity escalation triggers - automatic detection of when AI simulation should escalate to attorney referral based on factors like monetary value, legal complexity, time sensitivity, or jurisdictional uncertainty.

4. Demonstration Use Case Templates

Presentation/Demo Format "Let me show you how AI can assist someone facing [legal issue]. I'll demonstrate the interaction pattern, information gathering, and appropriate boundaries..."

Training Format "This scenario illustrates best practices for AI-assisted legal triage. Notice how the AI [specific behavior]. This demonstrates [key principle]..."

Educational Format "Legal AI systems must balance accessibility with professional boundaries. This example shows how to [demonstrate concept] while ensuring [compliance/ethical requirement]..."

Proof-of-Concept Format "Our AI system handles this [persona scenario] by [capability demonstration]. The value proposition includes [time savings/cost reduction/accessibility improvement] while maintaining [quality/compliance/ethics]..."

Enhanced Feature: Presentation builder - automatically generates slide decks, demonstration scripts, and talking points for showcasing AI legal assistance capabilities to different audiences (legal professionals, business stakeholders, technology teams, regulatory authorities).

5. Appropriate Escalation Frameworks

Demonstrates when and how to transition from AI assistance to human professionals:

Automatic Escalation Triggers

  • High monetary value (e.g., >€10,000 at stake)
  • Criminal law matters
  • Complex litigation strategy
  • Time-sensitive filing deadlines
  • Jurisdictional uncertainty
  • Conflicting legal authority
  • Novel legal questions
  • Ethical dilemmas

Warning Sign Detection

  • Statute of limitations concerns
  • Evidence spoliation risks
  • Adverse party represented by counsel
  • Regulatory investigation
  • Multiple legal domains intersecting
  • Client unable to articulate facts clearly
  • Emotional distress affecting judgment

Attorney Referral Best Practices

  • Identify practice area specialization needed
  • Explain initial consultation process
  • Discuss fee structures and engagement letters
  • Prepare documentation for attorney review
  • Set realistic expectations for legal process
  • Emphasize importance of timely action

Enhanced Feature: Attorney matching criteria generator - creates detailed specialist profiles for different legal issues, including practice area, experience level, jurisdictional licensing, language capabilities, and industry knowledge requirements.

6. Multi-Jurisdictional Awareness

Demonstrates handling of jurisdictional complexity:

Jurisdiction Identification

  • Ask location/jurisdiction early in interaction
  • Explain why jurisdiction matters
  • Flag cross-border or multi-jurisdictional issues
  • Identify applicable legal systems (common law vs. civil law)

Jurisdictional Limitations

  • Clearly state when AI cannot provide jurisdiction-specific information
  • Recommend local attorney consultation for jurisdiction-specific questions
  • Avoid overgeneralizing from one jurisdiction to another
  • Flag when US/UK law principles don't apply to EU/other jurisdictions

EU-Specific Considerations

  • Consumer protection directives (2-year guarantee, unfair contract terms)
  • Employment law frameworks (works councils, termination protections)
  • Data protection (GDPR) compliance requirements
  • Alternative dispute resolution (ODR platform for consumer disputes)

Enhanced Feature: Jurisdictional conflict identifier - detects when legal issue involves multiple jurisdictions and explains choice of law and forum selection considerations.

7. Ethical Boundary Demonstration

Shows how AI maintains ethical boundaries in legal contexts:

Unauthorized Practice of Law (UPL) Avoidance

  • Never characterizes AI output as "legal advice"
  • Always recommends attorney consultation for decisions
  • Avoids predicting case outcomes
  • Doesn't interpret statutes or case law for specific situations
  • Frames all output as general information only

Confidentiality Considerations

  • Discusses attorney-client privilege and its limitations
  • Explains why AI interactions may not be privileged
  • Recommends secure communication channels
  • Warns about disclosure risks in online interactions

Conflict of Interest Awareness

  • Explains why AI cannot represent both parties in dispute
  • Identifies potential conflicts in multi-party situations
  • Recommends separate representation where appropriate

Competence and Diligence

  • AI clearly states its limitations and uncertainty
  • Recommends verification of all information with attorney
  • Flags when issues exceed AI's capabilities
  • Emphasizes importance of current, jurisdiction-specific legal research

Enhanced Feature: Ethical boundary checker - analyzes AI responses to ensure they don't cross into legal advice, maintain appropriate disclaimers, and clearly distinguish information from recommendations.

Best Practices for Demonstrations

  1. Set Context Clearly: Always explain that scenarios are simulations for demonstration purposes only
  2. Emphasize Boundaries: Repeatedly clarify the distinction between legal information and legal advice
  3. Show the Transition: Demonstrate smooth handoff from AI to human attorney at appropriate points
  4. Highlight Value Add: Focus on time savings, accessibility, cost reduction, and process improvement
  5. Address Concerns: Proactively discuss limitations, risks, and mitigation strategies
  6. Use Realistic Details: Scenarios should be plausible and relatable while avoiding actual client information
  7. Vary Complexity: Demonstrate AI capabilities across simple to complex scenarios
  8. Show Data Protection: Explicitly model GDPR-compliant information handling
  9. Explain the "Why": Articulate reasoning behind AI responses and escalation decisions
  10. Invite Questions: Encourage audience engagement and address concerns transparently

Enhanced Feature: Demonstration quality assessment rubric - evaluates whether simulated interactions appropriately balance accessibility with professional boundaries, maintain ethical guardrails, and demonstrate clear value proposition.

Limitations and Disclaimers

This skill does NOT:

  • Provide legal advice for actual legal situations
  • Create attorney-client relationships or professional obligations
  • Replace consultation with qualified, licensed attorneys
  • Account for jurisdiction-specific laws, regulations, or procedures
  • Interpret statutes, case law, or regulations for specific cases
  • Predict legal outcomes or litigation results
  • Fulfill any legal compliance obligations
  • Constitute authorized practice of law in any jurisdiction

Users must:

  • Use simulations for demonstration and educational purposes only
  • Never rely on simulated scenarios for actual legal decisions
  • Consult qualified attorneys for all real legal matters
  • Verify all legal information with licensed professionals
  • Understand that laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently
  • Recognize that AI cannot exercise legal judgment
  • Obtain appropriate legal representation before taking legal action
  • Implement proper data protection measures for actual client data

Professional Responsibility: Legal professionals using this skill for demonstrations must comply with their applicable rules of professional conduct regarding advertising, client communications, unauthorized practice of law, and technology competence requirements.

Data Protection: While this skill models GDPR-compliant patterns, actual implementation of legal AI systems requires comprehensive data protection impact assessments, security measures, and compliance with applicable privacy laws. Consult qualified data protection officers and privacy counsel.

Regulatory Variation: Legal service delivery regulations vary significantly by jurisdiction. Some jurisdictions prohibit or heavily regulate non-lawyer involvement in legal services. Always verify compliance with applicable regulations before implementing AI-assisted legal services.

Example Use Cases

  1. Law Firm Innovation Team: Demonstrating AI-powered client intake and triage system to partners
  2. Legal Tech Startup: Showcasing product capabilities to potential investors or customers
  3. Corporate Legal Department: Training non-lawyer staff on appropriate AI use for legal questions
  4. Legal Education: Teaching law students about AI in legal practice and professional boundaries
  5. Access to Justice Initiative: Demonstrating how AI can improve legal information accessibility
  6. Regulatory Presentation: Showing compliance-focused AI implementation to bar association or regulatory authority

Scenario Customization Guide

To adapt personas for specific demonstration needs:

Industry Customization

  • Modify business contexts (tech, manufacturing, retail, etc.)
  • Adjust legal issues to industry-specific concerns
  • Include industry-specific regulations where relevant

Jurisdictional Customization

  • Specify applicable jurisdiction clearly
  • Reference jurisdiction-specific laws and procedures
  • Flag cross-border elements if demonstrating international capability

Complexity Customization

  • Add complicating factors for more sophisticated audiences
  • Simplify scenarios for general public demonstrations
  • Layer multiple legal issues for comprehensive demos

Audience Customization

  • Legal professionals: Emphasize technical accuracy and boundary management
  • Business stakeholders: Focus on efficiency and cost savings
  • Technology teams: Highlight integration and system capabilities
  • Regulators: Demonstrate compliance and consumer protection

FINAL REMINDER: This skill creates fictional scenarios for demonstration purposes only. It does NOT provide legal advice, create attorney-client relationships, or substitute for qualified legal counsel. All legal matters require consultation with licensed attorneys. Neither the skill creator nor Claude/Anthropic assumes any liability for reliance on simulated scenarios for actual legal decisions.

For Actual Legal Matters: Consult qualified, licensed attorneys in your jurisdiction. Do not use simulated scenarios as the basis for legal action or decisions. Legal rights and obligations vary significantly by jurisdiction and individual circumstances.

平台分布

Codex

32.95%
按下载量换算164

Claude

32.37%
按下载量换算161

Cursor

19.48%
按下载量换算97

Gemini CLI

8.85%
按下载量换算44

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

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