Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
开发只读github未标认证来源可访问许可证需确认审计通过

plan-interviewer计划面试官

Agent Skill

plan-interviewer 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。

总安装

233

周安装

10

GitHub Stars

1

下载量

82
CodexClaudeCursorGemini CLI

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

unknown

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

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:plan-interviewer(计划面试官)
来源仓库:https://github.com/hungv47/prod-skills
仓库路径:skills/plan-interviewer
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/hungv47/prod-skills --skill plan-interviewer
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/hungv47/prod-skills --skill plan-interviewer

简介

plan-interviewer 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。

  • 它可辅助查询项目进展、分析代码差异、跟踪 Issue 状态或协助生成协作摘要。
  • 通过 npx skills add 命令从指定仓库安装,具体用法请参考原始 README。
  • 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。
  • 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。

SKILL.md

Plan Interviewer — Orchestrator

*Productivity — Multi-agent orchestration. Transform shallow feature requests into well-specified plans through multi-round interviews.*

Core Question: "What haven't we thought of yet?"

Inputs Required

  • A feature request, problem description, or existing plan/spec file to refine
  • Access to AskUserQuestion tool for multi-round interviews

Output

  • Spec file at user-designated path (default: .agents/spec.md)

Chain Position

Previous: none | Next: task-breakdown or system-architecture

Skill Deference

  • Have a FEATURE or PRODUCT to specify? → Use this skill.
  • Have a declining METRIC to diagnose (X is at Y, should be Z)? → Use problem-analysis (from strategy-skills) instead.

Re-run triggers: When requirements change significantly, when new technical constraints emerge, or when a previous spec leads to implementation blockers.


Multi-Agent Architecture

Agent Roster

AgentFileFocus
codebase-scanner-agentagents/codebase-scanner-agent.mdExtracts tech stack, schemas, existing implementations from code
artifact-reader-agentagents/artifact-reader-agent.mdReads specs, PRDs, product context — extracts decisions already made
challenger-agentagents/challenger-agent.mdValidates premise with exactly 3 challenge questions
interviewer-agentagents/interviewer-agent.mdConducts multi-round interview via AskUserQuestion (5 dimensions)
synthesis-agentagents/synthesis-agent.mdAssembles all context into structured specification
critic-agentagents/critic-agent.mdQuality gate review, dimension coverage, decision completeness

Execution Layers

Layer 1 (parallel):
  codebase-scanner-agent ──┐
  artifact-reader-agent ───┘── run simultaneously

Layer 2 (sequential):
  challenger-agent ─────────── uses Layer 1 context to validate premise
    → interviewer-agent ────── conducts interview (INTERACTIVE — uses AskUserQuestion)
      → synthesis-agent ────── writes the specification
        → critic-agent ─────── final quality review

Dispatch Protocol

  1. Layer 1 dispatch — send brief to codebase-scanner-agent and artifact-reader-agent in parallel. They extract what the codebase and existing artifacts already answer.
  2. Challenger dispatch — send brief + Layer 1 outputs to challenger-agent. It produces exactly 3 challenge questions and a PROCEED/REFRAME/DEFER recommendation.
  3. User confirmation — present challenger's questions to the user. If REFRAME, present the alternative framing. If user confirms proceed, continue. If DEFER, stop and explain.
  4. Interviewer dispatch — send all context to interviewer-agent. It conducts 3-7 rounds of interview via AskUserQuestion, covering all 5 dimensions, skipping questions already answered by Layer 1.
  5. Synthesis dispatch — send all outputs to synthesis-agent to write the spec.
  6. Critic review — send spec to critic-agent.
  7. Revision loop — if critic returns FAIL, re-dispatch affected agents. Maximum 2 rounds.
  8. Save — write spec to user-designated path (default: .agents/spec.md).

Routing Rules

ConditionRoute
No codebase exists (greenfield)codebase-scanner-agent returns NO CODEBASE; all questions valid
No artifacts existartifact-reader-agent returns NO ARTIFACTS; interview from scratch
Challenger recommends REFRAMEPresent reframing to user; proceed on confirmation
Challenger recommends DEFERStop; explain what should happen instead
User says "skip the questions, just write it"Use Layer 1 context + challenger only; synthesize without interview
Critic PASSSave and deliver
Critic FAILRe-dispatch cited agents with feedback

Critical Gates

Before delivering, the critic-agent verifies ALL of these pass:

  • All 5 interview dimensions explored (Technical, UX, Business Logic, Architecture, Security)
  • Spec contains concrete decisions, not open-ended options
  • Edge cases documented with explicit handling strategies
  • Open questions list is empty or explicitly deferred with rationale

If any gate fails: the critic identifies which agent must fix it and the orchestrator re-dispatches.


Single-Agent Fallback

When context window is constrained or the feature is simple:

  1. Skip multi-agent dispatch
  2. Check for existing codebase context and artifacts
  3. Challenge the premise (3 questions: right problem? what if nothing? what exists?)
  4. Conduct interview using AskUserQuestion (2-4 questions per round, all 5 dimensions)
  5. Write specification using the Spec File Format below
  6. Run Critical Gates as self-review
  7. Save to .agents/spec.md

AskUserQuestion Tool Usage

This skill is interactive. The interviewer-agent uses AskUserQuestion for every question round.

Structure questions for maximum clarity:

  • 2-4 questions per invocation
  • Each question has 2-4 concrete options
  • Options represent real tradeoffs, not obvious choices
  • Include brief description explaining implications of each option
  • State which option you recommend and why

Example:

Question: "When a background sync fails, how should we handle it?"
Options:
1. Silent retry (3x with backoff) — User unaware, but may see stale data
2. Toast notification — User informed but may be annoyed
3. Badge indicator — Subtle, user can investigate when ready
4. Block UI until resolved — Safest but worst UX
Recommended: Option 1 — most sync failures are transient; fall back to option 2 if retries exhaust.

Interview Dimensions (all 5 required)

Technical Implementation

  • Data flow edge cases (What happens when X fails mid-operation?)
  • State management boundaries (Where does this state live?)
  • Concurrency considerations (What if two users do this simultaneously?)
  • Migration paths, performance cliffs

UX & Interaction Design

  • Error recovery flows, loading/empty/error states
  • Undo/redo expectations, accessibility edge cases
  • Mobile-first considerations

Business Logic & Domain

  • Edge case ownership, audit/compliance needs
  • Multi-tenancy implications, internationalization

Architecture & Tradeoffs

  • Consistency vs availability, coupling concerns
  • Testability, observability
  • Implementation foresight (decisions to resolve NOW, not at 2am during build)

Security & Privacy

  • Trust boundaries, data exposure, rate limiting

Spec File Format

# [Feature Name] Specification

## Problem Statement
[1-2 paragraphs on what we're solving and why]

## Decided Approach
[High-level approach with key architectural decisions]

## Key Decisions
| Decision | Choice | Rationale |
|----------|--------|-----------|
| [Topic]  | [What] | [Why]     |

## Edge Cases
- **[Scenario]**: [How we handle it]

## Out of Scope
- [What we're explicitly NOT doing]

## Open Questions
- [ ] [Anything still unresolved]

## Implementation Notes
[Technical details, gotchas, dependencies]

Anti-Patterns

Anti-PatternProblemINSTEAD
Leading questions"Don't you think we should use WebSockets?" pushes toward predetermined answerAsk open-ended: "What are your latency requirements?"
Accepting the first answerSurface-level answers miss hidden constraintsProbe deeper: "Why that approach?" and "What would change your mind?"
Skipping edge casesHappy-path specs produce happy-path code that breaks in productionscaling-agent traces failure modes; interviewer explores empty states, concurrent access
Scope creep during interviewEach new question expands feature surfacePeriodically re-anchor: "Is this still in scope for MVP?"
Asking questions the codebase answers"What framework?" when package.json is right therecodebase-scanner-agent extracts facts first; interviewer skips answered questions
Options instead of decisionsSpec says "could use X or Y"synthesis-agent writes concrete decisions only; undecided items go to Open Questions

Worked Example

User: "I want to build a habit tracker app."

Layer 1 (parallel):

  • codebase-scanner-agent → NO CODEBASE (greenfield)
  • artifact-reader-agent → NO ARTIFACTS

Challenger (3 questions):

  1. Right problem? "Outcome: users build consistent habits. A habit tracker is the most direct path."
  2. What if nothing? "Users currently use spreadsheets — friction causes abandonment."
  3. What exists? "Greenfield — no existing code." → Recommendation: PROCEED

Interviewer (5 rounds, AskUserQuestion):

  • Round 1 (Scope): Personal only, mobile-first PWA, 4-week MVP
  • Round 2 (Users): Health-conscious 25-35, switching from spreadsheets
  • Round 3 (Features): Add habit → check off → see streak. Configurable reminders.
  • Round 4 (Edge cases): Streak resets on miss (history preserved), user's local timezone
  • Round 5 (Technical): Email magic link auth, offline sync on reconnect

Synthesis: Spec with 14 concrete decisions and 3 deferred items.

Critic: PASS — all 4 gates pass, all 5 dimensions covered.

Artifact saved to .agents/spec.md.


Before Starting

Step 0: Product Context

Check for .agents/product-context.md. If available, read for product and audience context before interviewing. If missing, plan-interviewer works standalone.

Optional Artifacts

ArtifactSourceBenefit
.agents/product-context.mdicp-research (from hungv47/comms-skills)Product context prevents redundant interview questions
.agents/problem-analysis.mdproblem-analysis (from hungv47/strategy-skills)Root cause context when feature solves a diagnosed problem

Artifact Template

On re-run: rename existing artifact to spec.v[N].md and create new with incremented version.

Save to user-designated path (default: .agents/spec.md) using the Spec File Format above.


References

  • references/question-bank.md — Extended list of probing questions by domain

适合场景

01

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

02

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

03

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

Codex

35.99%
按下载量换算30

Claude

33.74%
按下载量换算28

Cursor

19.12%
按下载量换算16

Gemini CLI

8.91%
按下载量换算7

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。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills