Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

phx%3areview(phx%3 正在查看)

phx%3areview 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。

phx%3areview 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,权限为执行命令;许可证信息还不明确,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 59,696。

总安装 380周安装 16GitHub Stars 290下载 133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:phx%3areview(phx%3 正在查看)
来源仓库:https://github.com/oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix
仓库路径:skills/phx%3Areview
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix --skill phx: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/oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix --skill phx: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。

phx%3areview 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 Phoenix 框架相关的技术调研、代码审查或文档查阅等研究型任务。

通过 npx skills add 命令从指定 GitHub 仓库安装,需确认权限范围和操作边界。建议结合原始 README 核验具体用法,注意是否会触发联网或文件读写操作。适用宿主包括 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,接入前应确认版本、权限和运行环境要求。

来源仓库内路径:skills/phx%3Areview

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/oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix --skill ph…;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

    它需要执行命令,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

phx%3areview 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix --skill phx:review。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

phx%3areview 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。

phx%3areview 需要什么权限?

权限级别是执行命令。安装流程涉及命令执行,可能通过 npx skills add https://github.com/oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix --skill phx:review 联网下载 Skill 或依赖。用户安装前应确认命令来源、仓库内容和执行环境。

phx%3areview 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。

phx%3areview 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 380 次,近一周安装 16 次,下载 133 次,GitHub 290 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。

phx%3areview 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。

先想清楚的地方

  • 需要执行命令,装到常用环境前要先评估影响面。
  • 许可证没有明确标注,能不能商用、能不能再分发都不确定。
  • 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

  • 不能接受 Skill 在你机器上执行命令的人。
  • 需要明确授权才能用到公司项目里的场景。
  • 要求有安全扫描结论才肯安装的团队。

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
phx%3areview

phx%3 正在查看 · 本页

380290执行命令未明确未收录

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

Review Elixir/Phoenix Code

Review code by spawning parallel specialist agents. Find and explain issues — do NOT create tasks or fix anything.

Usage

/phx:review                          # Auto-detects task ID from branch/commits
/phx:review test                     # Review test files only
/phx:review security                 # Run security audit only
/phx:review oban                     # Review Oban workers only
/phx:review deploy                   # Validate deployment config
/phx:review iron-laws                # Check Iron Law violations only
/phx:review ENA-8931                 # Force Linear issue
/phx:review #42                      # Force GitHub issue
/phx:review .claude/plans/auth/plan.md    # Force plan / spec file
/phx:review --no-requirements        # Skip requirements coverage check

Arguments

$ARGUMENTS = Focus area, task ID, or path to plan/spec file.

When no requirements argument is passed, the skill auto-detects a task ID from the current git branch name and recent commits (see ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/requirements-detection.md).

Workflow

Step 1: Identify Changed Files and Prepare Directories

CRITICAL: Create output dirs BEFORE spawning agents — agents cannot create directories and writes will fail.

  1. Determine SLUG via Glob on .claude/plans/*/ (default: "review")
  2. Run mkdir -p ".claude/plans/${SLUG}/reviews" ".claude/plans/${SLUG}/summaries".claude/reviews
  3. Run git diff --name-only HEAD~5 and git diff --name-only main
  4. Save the diff base for pre-existing detection in Step 3b

Step 1b: Load Plan Context and Prior Reviews

  • Read .claude/plans/${SLUG}/scratchpad.md for planning decisions and rationale
  • Pass relevant decisions to agents as WHY-context (eliminates session archaeology)
  • Check .claude/plans/${SLUG}/reviews/ for prior output; if present, include a consolidated summary as "PRIOR FINDINGS" with: "Focus on NEW issues. Mark still-present issues as PERSISTENT."

Step 1c: Detect Requirements Source (skip on --no-requirements)

Find a task/spec whose requirements should be cross-checked against the diff. Priority order (stop at first match): explicit arg → conversation context → branch regex → commit subjects → latest plan → none. Full table, regexes, and fetch mapping in ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/requirements-detection.md.

Fetch the detected source into .claude/plans/${SLUG}/reviews/.requirements-input.md (Linear via mcp__linear__get_issue, GitHub via gh issue view, file via Read). Record REQ_SOURCE label (e.g. "Linear ENA-8931") for the verifier heading. On fetch failure, set SOURCE_STATUS=FETCH_FAILED and continue — verifier will emit NOT AVAILABLE rather than block the review.

Step 2: Spawn Review Agents (MANDATORY)

NEVER spawn the same agent role twice per review. One pass per role. NEVER analyze code yourself — use the Agent tool only. Zero agents = failure.

  1. Create a Claude Code task per agent via TaskCreate and TaskUpdate to in_progress
  2. For /phx:review or /phx:review all: select agents dynamically per the selection table in ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/agent-spawning.md
  3. For focused reviews (test|security|oban|deploy|iron-laws): spawn only the matching specialist from the focused mode table in the same reference
  4. If Step 1c succeeded (REQ_SOURCE non-empty and --no-requirements not passed): add elixir-phoenix:requirements-verifier to the same parallel batch. Pass these prompt inputs: REQUIREMENTS_TEXT (content of .requirements-input.md), REQUIREMENTS_SOURCE (REQ_SOURCE label), DIFF_FILES (git diff --name-only output), SOURCE_STATUS (only if FETCH_FAILED), output_file:.claude/plans/{slug}/reviews/requirements.md
  5. Spawn in ONE message with mode: "bypassPermissions" and run_in_background: true
  6. MANDATORY: pass explicit output_file per-agent (mapping in the reference)
  7. Include the CRITICAL prompt block: write by turn ~12, chat body ≤300 words
  8. Scope every agent to the diff: pass git diff --name-only output with "Focus on NEW code. Pre-existing: one-line {file}:{line} — {brief}. Do NOT deep-analyze unchanged files."

Step 3: Collect and Compress Findings

Wait for ALL agents to complete. Do NOT report status until every agent completes. Mark each task completed via TaskUpdate as it finishes.

Missing file fallback — after each agent finishes, verify its expected output_file exists. If missing (turn exhaustion, error):

  1. Append to .claude/plans/{slug}/scratchpad.md: [HH:MM] WARN: {agent} did not write {expected_path} — extracting from message
  2. Parse findings from the agent's return message as fallback
  3. Mark the section in the final review with ⚠️ EXTRACTED FROM AGENT MESSAGE (see scratchpad) — never silent

Verification-runner fallback — if it times out, run directly: mix compile --warnings-as-errors && mix format --check-formatted $(git diff --name-only HEAD~5 | grep '\.exs\?$' | tr '\n' ' ') && mix credo --strict && mix test

Context supervision — for 4+ agents, spawn elixir-phoenix:context-supervisor:

Prompt: "Compress review agent output.
  input_dir: .claude/plans/{slug}/reviews
  output_dir: .claude/plans/{slug}/summaries
  output_file: review-consolidated.md
  priority_instructions: BLOCKERs and WARNINGs: KEEP ALL.
    SUGGESTIONs: COMPRESS similar ones into groups.
    Deconfliction: when iron-law-judge and elixir-reviewer
    flag same code, keep iron-law-judge finding."

Skip the supervisor for focused (1-agent) reviews — read output directly.

Step 3b: Filter Findings (Anti-Noise)

Before writing the review, apply these overriding filters to each finding:

  1. Would a senior Elixir dev dismiss this as noise?
  2. Does the finding add complexity exceeding the problem's complexity?
  3. Are any findings duplicates reworded by different agents?
  4. Does the finding affect code actually changed in this diff?
  5. Is the finding on unchanged code (not in diff)? → Mark PRE-EXISTING

Demote or remove findings that fail filters 1-4. Mark pre-existing per filter 5.

Step 4: Generate Review Summary

Read consolidated/agent output. Write to .claude/plans/{slug}/reviews/{feature}-review.md with verdict: PASS | PASS WITH WARNINGS | REQUIRES CHANGES | BLOCKED.

Requirements Coverage in verdict: if the verifier ran, read its summary line and fold into the verdict:

  • Any UNMET → escalate to REQUIRES CHANGES (even if code-quality PASS)
  • Any PARTIAL (no UNMET) → downgrade PASS → PASS WITH WARNINGS
  • NOT AVAILABLE / all MET / UNCLEAR only → no verdict change

Insert the verifier's ## Requirements Coverage block into the review document before the per-agent findings so it's the first thing the user sees.

Step 5: Present Findings and Ask User

STOP and present the review. Do NOT create tasks or fix anything.

On BLOCKED or REQUIRES CHANGES: Show finding count by severity, then offer via AskUserQuestion: /phx:triage (recommended), /phx:plan, fix directly, or "I'll handle it myself".

On PASS / PASS WITH WARNINGS: Suggest /phx:compound, /phx:learn-from-fix.

Convention extraction: After presenting findings, offer: "Any findings to suppress or enforce as conventions?" See ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/conventions.md.

Iron Laws

  1. Review is READ-ONLY — Find and explain, never fix
  2. NEVER auto-fix after review — Always ask the user first
  3. Always offer both paths: /phx:plan and /phx:work
  4. Research before claiming — Agents MUST research before making claims about CI/CD or external services

Integration

/phx:plan → /phx:work → /phx:review (YOU ARE HERE) → Blocked? /phx:triage or /phx:plan | Pass? /phx:compound

See: ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/review-template.md, ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/example-review.md, ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/blocker-handling.md, ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/references/requirements-detection.md

平台分布

Codex

36.18%
按下载量换算48

Claude

26.83%
按下载量换算36

Cursor

18.75%
按下载量换算25

Gemini CLI

9.15%
按下载量换算12

安全审计

暂无安全审计结果可展示。

权限和风险

执行命令

安装流程涉及命令执行,可能通过 npx skills add https://github.com/oliver-kriska/claude-elixir-phoenix --skill phx:review 联网下载 Skill 或依赖。用户安装前应确认命令来源、仓库内容和执行环境。

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