Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
待分类权限需确认github未标认证来源可访问许可证需确认审计通过

process-flowchart-designer流程图设计器

Agent Skill

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。

总安装

1,740

周安装

74

GitHub Stars

48

下载量

610
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: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

简介

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。

SKILL.md

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

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

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

权限需确认

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。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