Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 待分类

process-flowchart-designer(流程图设计器)

process-flowchart-designer 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。

process-flowchart-designer 是待分类类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为权限未标注;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 2,248。

总安装 1,740周安装 74GitHub Stars 48下载 610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:process-flowchart-designer(流程图设计器)
来源仓库:https://github.com/travisjneuman/.claude
仓库路径:skills/process-flowchart-designer
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/travisjneuman/.claude --skill process-flowchart-designer
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/travisjneuman/.claude --skill process-flowchart-designer

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。

用于处理 GitHub 仓库、Issue、Pull Request 和代码协作信息。适合围绕仓库状态、代码变更或协作事项进行整理和辅助决策。可结合来源仓库和原始 README 继续核验具体用法和功能边界。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态及是否触发联网或命令执行。

安装方式:通过 GitHub 仓库安装,支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI。

来源仓库内路径:skills/process-flowchart-designer

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/travisjneuman/.claude --skill process-flowchar…;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

    权限没有明确标注,第一次使用时只给一个无关紧要的任务,观察它到底读了哪些文件和网络。

常见问题

6 条

process-flowchart-designer 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/travisjneuman/.claude --skill process-flowchart-designer。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

process-flowchart-designer 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。

process-flowchart-designer 需要什么权限?

权限级别没有明确标注。第一次使用时建议只给无关紧要的任务,观察它实际读写了哪些内容。

process-flowchart-designer 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。

process-flowchart-designer 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 1,740 次,近一周安装 74 次,下载 610 次,GitHub 48 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。

process-flowchart-designer 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
process-flowchart-designer

流程图设计器 · 本页

1,74048权限未标注未明确通过

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

name
process-flowchart-designer
description
Create process flowcharts and workflow diagrams from descriptions, with optimization suggestions and bottleneck identification. Use when mapping processes, designing workflows, or improving operational efficiency.

Process Flowchart Designer

Frameworks for translating business processes into clear visual diagrams, identifying inefficiencies, and designing optimized workflows.

Flowchart Notation

Standard Symbols

FLOWCHART SYMBOL REFERENCE:

  ┌─────────┐
  │ Rectangle│  = Process / Action step
  └─────────┘

  ◇ Diamond    = Decision point (Yes/No, True/False)

  ┌─────────┐
  │/ Parallel/│  = Parallelogram = Input/Output
  └─────────┘

  ( Oval )     = Start / End (Terminal)

  ┌─────────┐
  │ Cylinder │  = Database / Data store
  └─────────┘

  ┌─────────┐
  │ Document │  = Document / Report
  └~~~~~~~~~~┘

  ○ Circle     = Connector (links to another part)

  →  Arrow     = Flow direction

Text-Based Flowchart Template

PROCESS FLOWCHART: [Process Name]
Version: [X.X]
Owner: [Department/Role]
Last Updated: [Date]

  ( START )
      │
      ▼
  ┌──────────────┐
  │ Step 1:       │
  │ [Action]      │
  └──────┬───────┘
         │
         ▼
     ◇ Decision?
    / \
  Yes   No
  │      │
  ▼      ▼
┌────┐ ┌────┐
│ A  │ │ B  │
└──┬─┘ └──┬─┘
   │      │
   └──┬───┘
      │
      ▼
  ( END )

Process Mapping

Process Documentation Template

PROCESS MAP: [Name]

METADATA:
  Process Owner:     [Name/Role]
  Department:        [Department]
  Frequency:         [Daily/Weekly/Monthly/Ad hoc]
  Average Duration:  [Time]
  Trigger:           [What initiates this process]
  Output:            [What the process produces]

STEPS:
  #  | Step Name          | Actor       | Action              | System/Tool | Duration | Notes
  ---|--------------------| ------------|----------------------|-------------|----------|------
  1  | [Name]             | [Role]      | [What they do]       | [Tool]      | [Time]   |
  2  | [Name]             | [Role]      | [What they do]       | [Tool]      | [Time]   |
  3  | DECISION: [Query]  | [Role]      | [Evaluate criteria]  | [Tool]      | [Time]   |
  3a | [If Yes]           | [Role]      | [Action]             | [Tool]      | [Time]   |
  3b | [If No]            | [Role]      | [Action]             | [Tool]      | [Time]   |
  4  | [Name]             | [Role]      | [What they do]       | [Tool]      | [Time]   |

HANDOFFS:
  From         → To           | Trigger              | Method
  [Role A]     → [Role B]     | [When]               | [Email/System/etc.]

EXCEPTIONS:
  Exception              | Handling Procedure       | Escalation Path
  [What can go wrong]    | [What to do]             | [Who to contact]

SIPOC Diagram

SIPOC: [Process Name]

S - SUPPLIERS        I - INPUTS           P - PROCESS          O - OUTPUTS          C - CUSTOMERS
(Who provides?)      (What's needed?)     (High-level steps)   (What's produced?)   (Who receives?)

[Supplier 1]         [Input 1]            1. [Step]            [Output 1]           [Customer 1]
[Supplier 2]         [Input 2]            2. [Step]            [Output 2]           [Customer 2]
[Supplier 3]         [Input 3]            3. [Step]            [Output 3]           [Customer 3]
                     [Input 4]            4. [Step]
                                          5. [Step]

BOUNDARIES:
  Start: [Trigger event]
  End:   [Completion criteria]

Workflow Optimization

Bottleneck Identification

BOTTLENECK ANALYSIS: [Process Name]

For each step, evaluate:

Step | Duration | Wait Time | Handoff? | Rework Rate | Bottleneck Score
-----|----------|-----------|----------|-------------|------------------
1    | [time]   | [time]    | Yes/No   | [%]         | [1-10]
2    | [time]   | [time]    | Yes/No   | [%]         | [1-10]
3    | [time]   | [time]    | Yes/No   | [%]         | [1-10]

BOTTLENECK SCORING:
  Duration weight:    x3 (longest steps)
  Wait time weight:   x4 (idle time is waste)
  Handoff weight:     x2 (each handoff adds delay and error risk)
  Rework weight:      x5 (rework multiplies all other costs)

  Score = (Duration x 3) + (Wait x 4) + (Handoff x 2) + (Rework x 5)

TOP BOTTLENECKS (highest scores):
  1. Step [N]: [Description] — Score: [X]
     Root cause: [Why this step is slow/problematic]
     Recommendation: [How to fix]

  2. Step [N]: [Description] — Score: [X]
     Root cause: [Why]
     Recommendation: [Fix]

Waste Identification (Lean)

Waste TypeDefinitionSignsSolution
WaitingIdle time between stepsQueues, backlogsParallel processing, SLAs
OverprocessingDoing more than neededExcessive approvals, gold-platingSimplify, reduce sign-offs
ReworkFixing errorsHigh rejection rate, loopsError-proofing, validation
MotionUnnecessary movementMultiple systems, context switchingConsolidate tools
TransportMoving information unnecessarilyExcessive handoffsDirect routing
InventoryWork piling upLarge queues at stepsFlow-based processing
OverproductionProducing more than neededReports no one readsDemand-driven output
DefectsErrors that reach downstreamCustomer complaintsQuality at source

Process Improvement Template

IMPROVEMENT PROPOSAL: [Process Name]

CURRENT STATE:
  Total steps:          [N]
  Total duration:       [Time]
  Number of handoffs:   [N]
  Rework rate:          [%]
  Customer satisfaction: [Score]

PROPOSED CHANGES:
  Change #1: [Description]
    Current: [How it works now]
    Proposed: [How it will work]
    Impact: [Time saved / errors reduced / etc.]

  Change #2: [Description]
    Current: [How it works now]
    Proposed: [How it will work]
    Impact: [Time saved / errors reduced / etc.]

FUTURE STATE:
  Total steps:          [N] (was [N])
  Total duration:       [Time] (was [Time])
  Number of handoffs:   [N] (was [N])
  Rework rate:          [%] (was [%])
  Expected satisfaction: [Score]

IMPLEMENTATION:
  Phase 1: [Quick wins — Week 1-2]
  Phase 2: [System changes — Week 3-6]
  Phase 3: [Training and rollout — Week 7-8]

Swimlane Diagrams

Cross-Functional Process Map

SWIMLANE DIAGRAM: [Process Name]

                    TIME →
         ┌─────────────────────────────────────────┐
Customer │ (Request) ──→ [Wait] ──→ [Receive]      │
         ├─────────────────────────────────────────┤
Sales    │         [Review] ──→ [Approve] ──→       │
         ├─────────────────────────────────────────┤
Ops      │                    [Fulfill] ──→         │
         ├─────────────────────────────────────────┤
Finance  │                              [Invoice]   │
         └─────────────────────────────────────────┘

LEGEND:
  (  ) = External event
  [  ] = Process step
  ──→  = Flow direction
  Each row = one actor/department

RACI Matrix

RACI MATRIX: [Process Name]

Task / Step              | Role A | Role B | Role C | Role D
-------------------------|--------|--------|--------|-------
1. [Step name]           | R      | A      | C      | I
2. [Step name]           | I      | R      | A      |
3. [Decision point]      | C      | R      | A      | I
4. [Step name]           | A      | I      | R      |

R = Responsible (does the work)
A = Accountable (approves / owns the outcome)
C = Consulted (provides input before)
I = Informed (notified after)

RULES:
  - Every task has exactly ONE "A"
  - Every task has at least one "R"
  - Minimize C's and I's (reduce communication overhead)
  - "A" should not also be "R" if possible (separation of duties)

Decision Flow Design

Decision Tree Template

DECISION TREE: [Decision Name]

Question 1: [First evaluation criterion]
  │
  ├── YES → Question 2a: [Follow-up]
  │         ├── YES → OUTCOME A: [Action/Result]
  │         └── NO  → OUTCOME B: [Action/Result]
  │
  └── NO  → Question 2b: [Alternative path]
            ├── YES → OUTCOME C: [Action/Result]
            └── NO  → OUTCOME D: [Action/Result]

DECISION CRITERIA:
  Criterion           | Threshold        | Data Source
  [What to evaluate]  | [Pass/fail line] | [Where to check]

Escalation Matrix

ESCALATION MATRIX: [Process Name]

Severity | Definition              | Response Time | Escalation To    | Communication
---------|-------------------------|---------------|------------------|---------------
P1       | [Service down]          | 15 min        | [VP + On-call]   | All-hands alert
P2       | [Major degradation]     | 1 hour        | [Manager]        | Team channel
P3       | [Minor issue]           | 4 hours       | [Team lead]      | Ticket update
P4       | [Enhancement request]   | Next sprint   | [Product owner]  | Backlog

Automation Assessment

Automation Candidate Scoring

AUTOMATION ASSESSMENT: [Process Name]

For each step, score automation potential:

Step | Repetitive? | Rule-Based? | Digital? | Volume | Error Rate | Score
     | (1-5)       | (1-5)       | (1-5)    | (1-5)  | (1-5)      | (sum)
-----|-------------|-------------|----------|--------|------------|------
1    | [score]     | [score]     | [score]  | [score]| [score]    | [/25]
2    | [score]     | [score]     | [score]  | [score]| [score]    | [/25]

SCORING GUIDE:
  5 = Highly automatable (always the same, clear rules, fully digital)
  3 = Partially automatable (some variation, some judgment needed)
  1 = Not automatable (creative, subjective, requires human judgment)

RECOMMENDATIONS:
  Score 20-25: Automate fully (RPA, workflow automation)
  Score 15-19: Automate with human review checkpoints
  Score 10-14: Augment with tools (templates, checklists)
  Score 5-9:   Keep manual (human judgment essential)

TOP AUTOMATION CANDIDATES:
  1. Step [N]: Score [X]/25 — Tool: [Recommended tool]
  2. Step [N]: Score [X]/25 — Tool: [Recommended tool]

Diagramming Tools Reference

ToolTypeBest ForCost
MermaidCode-basedDevelopers, version controlFree
draw.ioVisual editorGeneral business usersFree
LucidchartCloud visualTeams, collaborationFreemium
Figma/FigJamCollaborativeDesign teamsFreemium
WhimsicalSimple visualQuick wireframesFreemium
PlantUMLCode-basedDevelopers, UMLFree

Mermaid.js Quick Reference

graph TD
    A[Start] --> B{Decision?}
    B -->|Yes| C[Process A]
    B -->|No| D[Process B]
    C --> E[End]
    D --> E

See Also

平台分布

Codex

33.72%
按下载量换算206

Claude

32.51%
按下载量换算198

Cursor

18.82%
按下载量换算115

Gemini CLI

10.02%
按下载量换算61

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

权限未标注

当前来源未能明确判断权限范围,默认进入异常复核队列。

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