Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

problem-solving-methodology(问题解决方法)

problem-solving-methodology 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 OpenClaw 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。

problem-solving-methodology 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 OpenClaw,通过ClawHub获取,权限为执行命令;许可证为 MIT-0,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 8,279。

总安装 16,746周安装 712GitHub Stars 公开资料未说明下载 5,867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-0
版本
1.0.2

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:problem-solving-methodology(问题解决方法)
来源仓库:https://github.com/lovensky1992-wk/problem-solving-methodology
安装命令:
openclaw skills install problem-solving-methodology
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 OpenClaw 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。

ClawHubOpenClaw
openclaw skills install problem-solving-methodology

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。

使用时:(1) 问题原因不清楚需要调查/“分析一下这个问题”/“排查一下”,(2) 之前的修复尝试失败了,(3) 问题涉及多个组件交互/“为什么会这样”/“调查一下原因”,(4) 修改风险有或答案/“诊断一下”,(5) 用户明确要求先分析再修复。

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 OpenClaw;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 openclaw skills install problem-solving-methodology;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

problem-solving-methodology 怎么安装?

在终端执行 openclaw skills install problem-solving-methodology。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

problem-solving-methodology 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 OpenClaw。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。

problem-solving-methodology 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 openclaw skills install problem-solving-methodology 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。

problem-solving-methodology 是免费的吗?

来源标注的许可证是 MIT-0。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。

problem-solving-methodology 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 16,746 次,近一周安装 712 次,下载 5,867 次。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。

problem-solving-methodology 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

  • 专注 OpenClaw 一种宿主,触发方式和使用习惯不用来回切换。
  • 许可证明确为 MIT-0,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

  • 需要执行命令,装到常用环境前要先评估影响面。
  • 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 OpenClaw,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

  • 不能接受 Skill 在你机器上执行命令的人。
  • 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
problem-solving-methodology

问题解决方法 · 本页

16,746—执行命令MIT-0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

name
problem-solving
version
1.0.0
description
>

Structured Problem Solving

When to Use This vs. Direct Fix

Direct fix (skip this skill):

  • Error message points to exact cause
  • One-line config/code fix
  • You've seen this exact problem before

Use this skill:

  • You'd need to say "可能是..." to explain the cause
  • 2+ components involved
  • You already tried a fix that didn't work
  • Wrong fix could cause data loss, privacy leak, or downtime

The Process

Step 0: Question Dissolution (消解层)

Before solving, check if the problem itself is valid. Many problems dissolve when examined properly.

Run these 3 checks sequentially. If any check dissolves the problem, stop and tell the user — a dissolved problem is more valuable than a solved one.

0.1 Language Trap Detection (语言陷阱)

Does the problem statement contain vague, undefined key terms?

Common trap words: "优化" "合适" "更好" "正常" "应该" "稳定"

Test: Can you give a measurable or actionable definition for every key term? If not, the problem can't be solved because it hasn't been stated.

→ If trapped: Ask the user to define the vague term. "你说的'优化'具体指什么?响应时间从 X 降到 Y?还是内存占用?还是用户体验?"

0.2 Hidden Assumption Check (假设检验)

Rewrite the problem as: "This problem assumes X. Is X true?"

Common false assumptions:

  • "系统变慢了" → assumes it was faster before (was it? measured when?)
  • "用户不喜欢这个功能" → assumes users have tried it (have they? data?)
  • "我们需要加这个功能" → assumes the current system can't do it (can it?)

→ If assumption is false: Tell the user. "你的问题假设了「X」,但这个前提可能不成立。如果 X 不成立,问题就消失了。"

0.3 Question vs. Problem Classification
  • Question: Has a standard answer, can be resolved by looking it up or reading docs

- → Answer directly, don't enter the full diagnostic process

  • Problem: No standard answer, requires investigation + experimentation

- → Continue to Step 1

If the problem survives all 3 checks, proceed to full diagnosis.


Step 1: Define the Problem

Turn vague "something's wrong" into a precise statement.

问题:[一句话]
现象:[具体发生了什么]
预期:[应该是什么样]
影响:[谁受影响,严重程度]
可复现:[是/否,触发条件]

Rules:

  • Describe what you observe, not what you think caused it
  • "webchat replies appear in DingTalk group" = problem ✅
  • "origin got polluted" = hypothesis, not problem ❌

Step 2: Diagnose

Do not skip to fixing. Trace the data flow end-to-end first.

2.1 Map the call chain
Input → Step A → Step B → Step C → Output
          ↓          ↓          ↓
        Check      Check      Check
2.2 Verify each step

Read actual values (logs, state files, source code). Do not guess.

2.3 Narrow down

Find the first step where output diverges from expected. That's where the bug is.

2.4 Confirm root cause

Three questions before you declare root cause:

  1. Why? — Explain the mechanism, not just the symptom
  2. Sufficient? — If I fix this, will the problem definitely disappear?
  3. Unique? — Is there another cause that could produce the same symptom?

All three must be answered. If not → keep diagnosing.

Diagnostic tools (prefer in order):

  1. Error messages / logs (fastest)
  2. State inspection (config files, DB, session store)
  3. Source code tracing (most reliable)
  4. Minimal reproduction experiment

Step 3: Design Solutions

Generate at least 2 candidate solutions. Compare on:

DimensionQuestion
EffectivenessFixes root cause or just symptom?
RiskCould it break something else?
ComplexityHow many components touched?
ReversibilityCan we roll back if wrong?
DurabilitySurvives restarts / updates?
Side effectsImpact on other features?

Present as:

方案 A:[one line]
  ✅ [pros]  ⚠️ [risks]

方案 B:[one line]
  ✅ [pros]  ⚠️ [risks]

→ 推荐 A,因为 [reason]

Always include the "do nothing / workaround" option if viable.

Step 4: Execute

Pre-flight checklist:

  • [ ] Root cause confirmed (not guessed)
  • [ ] Solution evaluated (not first idea)
  • [ ] User confirmed (for risky changes)
  • [ ] Rollback plan ready

Rules:

  • Change one variable at a time
  • Record what was changed and what it was before
  • Minimize scope — don't "fix other things while you're at it"

Step 5: Verify

Three levels of verification:

  1. Direct: Reproduce original trigger → problem gone?
  2. Regression: Related features still work?
  3. Durability: Survives restart / next trigger?

Show evidence, don't say "应该好了".

Step 6: Review

## 复盘:[问题名]
耗时:X 分钟(有效 Y / 弯路 Z)
根因:[一句话]
修复:[一句话]
弯路:[走了什么弯路]
教训:[提炼的规则]

Write lessons to .learnings/ if reusable.

诊断超时与死胡同处理

信号动作
同一假设连续 3 次验证无结论停止,换假设或换诊断维度
累计诊断 >15 分钟无进展暂停,向用户汇报已排除项 + 当前卡点,询问是否有额外线索
累计尝试 >5 个假设均被否定考虑问题是否需要消解(回 Step 0)或需要更多上下文
修复后问题复现不叠加补丁,回退到修复前状态,重新走 Step 1

Anti-patterns

PatternWhat it looks likeFix
Guess-and-fixSee symptom → hypothesize → change immediatelyMap call chain first
One-end-onlyCheck only input or outputTrace full data flow
Surface fixChange the bad value without asking why it's badAsk "why did it become this value?"
Multi-changeChange 3 things at onceOne variable at a time
Premature victory"Should be fixed now" without checkingShow evidence
No rollbackForget to record original valuesBackup before modify

Communication During Problem-Solving

  • Define: Confirm understanding ("你说的问题是 X 对吗?")
  • Diagnose: Share progress, don't go silent ("在查 Y 环节,发现了 Z")
  • Design: Give choices, not just one option
  • Execute: Confirm before risky operations
  • Verify: Ask user to check on their end
  • Throughout: Say "I'm not sure yet" over false confidence

下一步建议(条件触发)

问题解决后,根据结果判断是否推荐下一步。

触发条件推荐
根因是代码 bug,修复需要多文件改动「根因清楚了,修复交给 coding-agent spawn Claude Code 来做。」
问题根因值得记录(同类问题可能再犯)「这个教训值得记下来,写到 .learnings/ 防止再犯。」
问题在消解层被消解(问题本身不成立)「问题已经消解了。如果背后有更大的决策要做,可以拉出来单独讨论。」
诊断过程发现系统架构层面的隐患「这次修好了,但架构上还有隐患。要不要排个时间做一次 healthcheck?」

平台分布

OpenClaw

79.23%
按下载量换算4,648

安全审计

VirusTotal

通过

ClawScan

通过

Static analysis

通过

权限和风险

执行命令

安装流程涉及命令执行,可能通过 openclaw skills install problem-solving-methodology 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