Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

fix-review(修复评论)

fix-review 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。

fix-review 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,权限为需要联网;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 52,496。

总安装 558周安装 23GitHub Stars 25下载 182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:fix-review(修复评论)
来源仓库:https://github.com/oimiragieo/agent-studio
仓库路径:skills/fix-review
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/oimiragieo/agent-studio --skill fix-review
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/oimiragieo/agent-studio --skill fix-review

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。

fix-review 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。适用于修复审查和问题排查相关的研究检索任务。通过 GitHub 仓库安装,使用 npx skills add 命令添加技能。

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。fix-review 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

来源仓库内路径:skills/fix-review

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/oimiragieo/agent-studio --skill fix-review;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

fix-review 怎么安装?

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

fix-review 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。

fix-review 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。

fix-review 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。

fix-review 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 558 次,近一周安装 23 次,下载 182 次,GitHub 25 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。

fix-review 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
fix-review

修复评论 · 本页

55825需要联网未明确有提醒

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

Fix Review Skill

Overview

This skill implements Trail of Bits' fix review methodology for the agent-studio framework. When a security audit produces findings and developers commit fixes, this skill systematically verifies that each finding is properly addressed without introducing new vulnerabilities or regressions.

Source repository: https://github.com/trailofbits/skills License: CC-BY-SA-4.0 Output: Structured FIX_REVIEW_REPORT.md

When to Use

  • After developers commit fixes for security audit findings
  • During PR review of security-related changes
  • When verifying remediation of vulnerability reports
  • Before closing security findings in tracking systems
  • When reviewing patches for CVE remediations
  • After automated security tool findings are addressed

Iron Law

NO FINDING CLOSED WITHOUT FIX VERIFICATION

A finding is not fixed until the fix has been reviewed against the original finding description, verified to address the root cause, and confirmed not to introduce new issues.

Fix Status Categories

StatusMeaning
FIXEDFinding is fully addressed. Root cause eliminated. No regressions introduced.
PARTIALLY_FIXEDSome aspects addressed but gaps remain. More dangerous than unfixed.
NOT_ADDRESSEDFix does not relate to the finding, or finding location unchanged.
CANNOT_DETERMINEInsufficient context or code complexity prevents definitive assessment.
NEW_ISSUEFix introduces a new vulnerability or regression.

Anti-Pattern Detection

The following anti-patterns indicate potentially incorrect or incomplete fixes:

Anti-Pattern 1: Validation Removed

ALERT: Input validation was removed or weakened in the fix.

Indicators:

  • Deleted input sanitization calls
  • Relaxed regex patterns
  • Removed length/type checks
  • Weakened allowlist to blocklist

Anti-Pattern 2: Access Control Weakened

ALERT: Authorization checks were reduced or bypassed in the fix.

Indicators:

  • Removed authentication middleware
  • Changed role checks from strict to permissive
  • Added bypass conditions to access control
  • Removed rate limiting

Anti-Pattern 3: Error Handling Reduced

ALERT: Error handling was simplified or removed, potentially hiding failures.

Indicators:

  • Replaced specific catch blocks with generic catch-all
  • Added empty catch blocks
  • Removed error logging
  • Changed error responses from specific to generic (hiding useful diagnostics)

Anti-Pattern 4: External Call Reordering

ALERT: Order of external calls changed, potentially creating race conditions or TOCTOU.

Indicators:

  • Authorization check moved after data access
  • Validation moved after processing
  • Lock acquisition moved or removed
  • Transaction boundaries changed

Anti-Pattern 5: Integer Operation Changes

ALERT: Integer arithmetic modified, check for overflow/underflow/truncation.

Indicators:

  • Changed integer types (int64 to int32, uint to int)
  • Added/removed overflow checks
  • Changed comparison operators (> to >=, == to!=)
  • Modified loop bounds

Anti-Pattern 6: Crypto Downgrade

ALERT: Cryptographic operations were changed in a potentially weakening way.

Indicators:

  • Algorithm changed (AES-256 to AES-128, SHA-256 to SHA-1)
  • Key length reduced
  • Removed salt/nonce/IV
  • Changed from authenticated to unauthenticated encryption

Workflow

Step 1: Load Findings

Read the original findings report to understand what was found:

# Read findings file
cat findings-report.md

# Or extract from issue tracker
gh issue view <issue-number>

Step 2: Identify Fix Commits

Map each finding to its fix commit(s):

# View commits since the findings report
git log --oneline --since="<audit-date>"

# View a specific fix commit
git show <commit-hash>

# View PR diff
gh pr diff <pr-number>

Step 3: Analyze Each Fix

For each finding-fix pair:

  1. Re-read the finding description and affected code location
  2. Read the fix diff line by line
  3. Check root cause: Does the fix address the root cause or just the symptom?
  4. Check completeness: Are all instances of the pattern fixed?
  5. Check anti-patterns: Does the fix match any anti-pattern?
  6. Check regressions: Does the fix break adjacent functionality?
  7. Assign status: FIXED / PARTIALLY_FIXED / NOT_ADDRESSED / CANNOT_DETERMINE / NEW_ISSUE

Step 4: Generate Report

FIX_REVIEW_REPORT Format

# Fix Review Report

**Date**: YYYY-MM-DD
**Reviewer**: [agent-type]
**Audit Reference**: [original audit report path]
**Commits Reviewed**: [list of commit hashes]

## Summary

| Status           | Count |
| ---------------- | ----- |
| FIXED            | N     |
| PARTIALLY_FIXED  | N     |
| NOT_ADDRESSED    | N     |
| CANNOT_DETERMINE | N     |
| NEW_ISSUE        | N     |

## Finding Reviews

### Finding F-001: [Title]

- **Original Severity**: Critical/High/Medium/Low/Informational
- **Original Location**: `file:line`
- **Fix Commit**: `<hash>`
- **Fix Status**: FIXED | PARTIALLY_FIXED | NOT_ADDRESSED | CANNOT_DETERMINE
- **Anti-Patterns Detected**: None | [list]

**Original Finding Summary**:
[Brief description of the finding]

**Fix Analysis**:
[Line-by-line analysis of what the fix does]

**Root Cause Addressed**: Yes/No/Partial
[Explanation]

**Regression Risk**: None/Low/Medium/High
[Explanation of potential regressions]

**Remaining Gaps** (if PARTIALLY_FIXED):

- [ ] Gap 1: [description]
- [ ] Gap 2: [description]

---

### Finding F-002: [Title]

[Same structure as above]

---

## New Issues Introduced

### NI-001: [Title]

- **Introduced By**: `<commit-hash>`
- **Location**: `file:line`
- **Severity**: Critical/High/Medium/Low
- **Description**: [What the new issue is]
- **Recommendation**: [How to fix it]

## Recommendations

1. [Prioritized list of remaining actions]
2. [Re-audit recommendations if needed]

Integration with Agent-Studio

Recommended Workflow

  1. Run audit-context-building to deeply analyze the code
  2. After fixes are committed, invoke fix-review to verify
  3. Feed report to code-reviewer for additional review perspectives
  4. Use variant-analysis to check if similar patterns exist elsewhere

Complementary Skills

SkillRelationship
audit-context-buildingProvides deep context for understanding fixes
differential-reviewSecurity-focused diff review (lower granularity)
variant-analysisFinds unpatched variants of fixed vulnerabilities
static-analysisAutomated confirmation of fix effectiveness
code-reviewerGeneral code quality review of fix commits

Iron Laws

  1. NO FINDING CLOSED WITHOUT FIX VERIFICATION — A finding is not fixed until the fix has been reviewed against the original finding, verified to address root cause, and confirmed not to introduce new issues.
  2. ALWAYS compare fix against original finding — reviewing the diff in isolation misses context; the fix must address the specific vulnerability described.
  3. ALWAYS check for all instances — if a pattern is fixed in one location, verify that all other instances of the same pattern are also fixed.
  4. NEVER close PARTIALLY_FIXED findings — partial fixes are more dangerous than unfixed findings because they create false confidence.
  5. ALWAYS check adjacent code paths — fixes that pass all anti-pattern checks can still introduce regressions in code that depends on the changed behavior.

Anti-Patterns

Anti-PatternWhy It FailsCorrect Approach
Reviewing diff without reading findingFix may address wrong issue or only surface symptomAlways re-read original finding before reviewing fix diff
Closing finding after any code changeChange may be unrelated or insufficientVerify fix status is FIXED with root cause elimination confirmed
Ignoring partial fixesPARTIALLY_FIXED is more dangerous than NOT_ADDRESSED (false security)Track remaining gaps explicitly; keep finding open
Skipping anti-pattern checklistSubtle regressions (weakened validation, reordered checks) go unseenRun all 6 anti-pattern checks on every fix diff
Not checking for variant vulnerabilitiesSame bug pattern likely exists elsewhere in codebaseInvoke variant-analysis after confirming fix

Memory Protocol (MANDATORY)

Before starting:

Read .claude/context/memory/learnings.md

Check for:

  • Original findings report and any prior fix review reports
  • Known anti-pattern frequencies from previous fix reviews
  • Previous fix quality patterns for this codebase

After completing:

  • Anti-pattern frequency data -> .claude/context/memory/learnings.md
  • Fix quality concern -> .claude/context/memory/issues.md
  • Decision about finding status -> .claude/context/memory/decisions.md
ASSUME INTERRUPTION: If it's not in memory, it didn't happen.

平台分布

Claude

33.24%
按下载量换算60

Codex

31.74%
按下载量换算58

Cursor

20.03%
按下载量换算36

Gemini CLI

9.6%
按下载量换算17

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

可疑

Snyk

可疑

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。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