Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 运维和基础设施

rapid-triage-reasoning(快速分类推理)

rapid-triage-reasoning 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。

rapid-triage-reasoning 是运维和基础设施类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为需要联网;许可证为 MIT,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在运维和基础设施类的 2,449 个 Skill 里排第 2,346。

总安装 196周安装 8GitHub Stars 4下载 63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

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:rapid-triage-reasoning(快速分类推理)
来源仓库:https://github.com/kimasplund/claude_cognitive_reasoning
仓库路径:skills/rapid-triage-reasoning
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/kimasplund/claude_cognitive_reasoning --skill rapid-triage-reasoning
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。不同来源提供的安装方式可能略有差异;本站展示可直接复制的安装命令,安装前请核对来源页面。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/kimasplund/claude_cognitive_reasoning --skill rapid-triage-reasoning

这个 Skill 是做什么的

运维和基础设施类 Skill 处理部署、监控、日志和云资源,多数需要较高的执行权限。

rapid-triage-reasoning 用于处理 GitHub 仓库、Issue 和 Pull Request。适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中围绕代码变更进行整理。可结合来源仓库和原始 README 继续核验具体用法,建议确认权限范围。

安装命令:npx skills add https://github.com/kimasplund/claude_cognitive_reasoning --skill rapid-triage-reasoning 使用前应检查是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写操作。

来源仓库内路径:skills/rapid-triage-reasoning

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/kimasplund/claude_cognitive_reasoning --skill…;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

    它需要需要联网,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

rapid-triage-reasoning 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/kimasplund/claude_cognitive_reasoning --skill rapid-tria…。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

rapid-triage-reasoning 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。

rapid-triage-reasoning 需要什么权限?

权限级别是需要联网。该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

rapid-triage-reasoning 是免费的吗?

来源标注的许可证是 MIT。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。

rapid-triage-reasoning 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 196 次,近一周安装 8 次,下载 63 次,GitHub 4 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。

rapid-triage-reasoning 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。
  • 3 个目录同时收录,说明这个 Skill 流传比较广。
  • 许可证明确为 MIT,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

  • 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。
  • 需要处理运维和基础设施类任务、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

  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

运维和基础设施类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
brainstorming

头脑风暴 · Codex、Claude

3,148,776173,131操作浏览器MIT通过
copywriting

文案写作 · Codex、Claude

1,996,72425,583需要联网MIT通过
openclaw-secure-linux-cloud

OpenClaw secure linux cloud 命令行 · Codex、Claude

1,853,08840接触敏感数据未明确未通过
xget

xget 命令行 · Codex、Claude

1,799,28040执行命令未明确未通过
requesting-code-review

代码审查请求 · Codex、Claude

1,590,144173,103权限未标注MIT通过
rapid-triage-reasoning

快速分类推理 · 本页

1964需要联网MIT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

Rapid Triage Reasoning (RTR)

Purpose: Make defensible decisions under extreme time pressure. RTR accepts that perfect is the enemy of good when time is the critical constraint.

When to Use Rapid Triage Reasoning

Use RTR when:

  • Decision needed in minutes, not hours
  • Production incident requiring immediate action
  • Hard deadline with no extension possible
  • Stakes of delay exceed stakes of suboptimal choice
  • "No decision" is worse than "imperfect decision"

Don't use RTR when:

  • You actually have time (even if it feels urgent)
  • Decision is irreversible AND high-stakes (take the time)
  • Problem requires deep analysis (flag for later, make temporary decision)
  • You can buy time by acknowledging the problem

RTR vs Other Patterns:

  • ToT: When you need THE BEST (RTR: when you need SOMETHING GOOD NOW)
  • HE: When you need THE CAUSE (RTR: when you need TO ACT before knowing cause)
  • BoT: When you need ALL OPTIONS (RTR: when you need ONE OPTION FAST)

Core Methodology: RAPID Framework

R - Recognize Constraints

Goal: Explicitly acknowledge time pressure and scope limits

Process (30 seconds):

  1. State the hard deadline: "Decision needed by [TIME]"
  2. State consequences of delay: "If we don't decide by then, [CONSEQUENCE]"
  3. State quality floor: "Minimum acceptable outcome is [THRESHOLD]"
  4. Acknowledge what you're sacrificing: "We may miss [OPTIMIZATION]"

Template:

## Time Constraint Recognition

**Deadline**: [Specific time or duration]
**Cost of Delay**: [What happens if we miss deadline]
**Quality Floor**: [Minimum acceptable outcome]
**Acceptable Sacrifice**: [What we're giving up for speed]

Example:

## Time Constraint Recognition

**Deadline**: 5 minutes (users experiencing errors NOW)
**Cost of Delay**: Every minute = ~100 failed transactions
**Quality Floor**: Stop the bleeding, even if not root cause fix
**Acceptable Sacrifice**: May need to revisit with proper fix later

A - Assess Available Options

Goal: Generate options you can actually execute in time

Process (1-2 minutes):

  1. List ONLY options executable within deadline
  2. Don't waste time on options that require unavailable resources
  3. Include "do nothing / wait" as explicit option
  4. Include "reversible quick fix" options
  5. Maximum 4 options (cognitive limit under pressure)

Feasibility Filter:

| Option | Executable in Time? | Reversible? | Keep? |
|--------|---------------------|-------------|-------|
| [Option 1] | Yes/No | Yes/No | Yes/No |
| [Option 2] | Yes/No | Yes/No | Yes/No |

Discard any option where "Executable in Time" = No

Template:

## Viable Options (Max 4)

### Option 1: [Name]
- **Action**: [Specific steps]
- **Time to Execute**: [Minutes]
- **Reversible**: [Yes/No/Partially]

### Option 2: [Name]
...

### Option N: Do Nothing / Wait
- **Action**: Accept current state
- **Rationale**: [When this is actually correct]

P - Prioritize by Reversibility

Goal: Prefer reversible actions when uncertain

Reversibility Hierarchy:

  1. Fully Reversible (Prefer): Can undo with no lasting effects
  2. Partially Reversible: Can mitigate but not fully undo
  3. Irreversible (Caution): Cannot undo, permanent consequences

Decision Rule:

  • If uncertain AND options have similar outcomes → Choose most reversible
  • If one option clearly better AND irreversible → Still okay if confidence >70%
  • If uncertain AND must choose irreversible → Get second opinion if ANY time remains

Quick Assessment Matrix:

| Option | Expected Outcome | Confidence | Reversibility | Score |
|--------|------------------|------------|---------------|-------|
| A | [Outcome] | [%] | [1-3] | [Calc] |
| B | [Outcome] | [%] | [1-3] | [Calc] |

Score = Confidence × (Reversibility + 1) / 4
Prefer highest score

I - Implement with Checkpoints

Goal: Start acting while maintaining ability to course-correct

Process:

  1. Begin executing chosen option IMMEDIATELY
  2. Set checkpoint at 25% and 50% of remaining time
  3. At each checkpoint: Is it working? Continue or pivot?
  4. Document what you're doing (brief notes, not essays)

Checkpoint Template:

## Execution Log

**Started**: [Time]
**Action**: [What we're doing]

### Checkpoint 1 (25%): [Time]
- Working? [Yes/Partially/No]
- Continue? [Yes/Pivot to Option X]

### Checkpoint 2 (50%): [Time]
- Working? [Yes/Partially/No]
- Continue? [Yes/Pivot to Option X]

Pivot Rules:

  • Pivot if current action is clearly not working
  • Don't pivot just because you thought of something better
  • Pivot to next option in priority list, don't re-analyze

D - Document for Follow-up

Goal: Enable proper analysis after the crisis

Process (do WHILE acting, not after):

  1. Note what you tried and results
  2. Flag items for post-incident review
  3. Capture hypotheses you didn't have time to test
  4. Note any technical debt created

Template:

## RTR Decision Record

**Situation**: [1-sentence summary]
**Time Pressure**: [Why urgent]
**Decision Made**: [What we chose]
**Rationale**: [Why, in 1-2 sentences]
**Outcome**: [What happened]

### Follow-up Required
- [ ] [Investigation or fix needed]
- [ ] [Technical debt to address]
- [ ] [Root cause analysis with HE]

Time Budgets by Scenario

ScenarioTotal TimeRAPID
5-minute incident5 min30s1m30s2.5m30s
15-minute deadline15 min1m3m2m8m1m
30-minute decision30 min2m5m3m18m2m
1-hour critical60 min3m10m7m35m5m

If you have >1 hour, consider if RTR is actually needed


Pre-Built Triage Patterns

Pattern 1: Production Incident Triage

## Incident Triage (5 minutes)

### Immediate Questions (1 min)
1. What's the user impact? [Severity 1-4]
2. Is it getting worse? [Yes/No/Stable]
3. When did it start? [Time]
4. Any recent changes? [Yes/No]

### Triage Decision Tree (1 min)
- Recent deploy? → Rollback first, investigate second
- External dependency down? → Failover or graceful degradation
- Resource exhaustion? → Scale up or restart
- Unknown? → Enable verbose logging, restart if safe

### Action (3 min)
[Execute chosen action, monitor]

### Document (ongoing)
[Brief notes for postmortem]

Pattern 2: Meeting Decision Triage

## Meeting Decision (2 minutes before deadline)

### Frame (15s)
"We need to decide [X] in the next 2 minutes"

### Options (30s)
"Our options are: A, B, or defer to [person/time]"

### Quick Poll (30s)
"Any strong objections to [recommended option]?"

### Decide (15s)
"Going with [option]. We can revisit in [timeframe] if needed"

### Document (30s)
[Note decision, rationale, revisit date]

Pattern 3: Technical Triage

## Technical Decision Under Pressure

### Constraint Check (30s)
- Time available: [X minutes]
- Reversibility requirement: [High/Medium/Low]
- Blast radius if wrong: [Small/Medium/Large]

### Option Generation (1 min)
- Conservative option: [Safest choice]
- Aggressive option: [Fastest/best if works]
- Middle ground: [Balance]

### Selection (30s)
IF blast radius = Large → Conservative
ELSE IF time < 10min → Aggressive (if reversible)
ELSE → Middle ground

### Execute
[Go with selected option]

Common Mistakes

  1. Fake Urgency: Treating everything as urgent

- Fix: Ask "What happens if I take 30 more minutes?" - If answer is "nothing much" → Not RTR territory

  1. Analysis Paralysis Under Pressure: Freezing when time is short

- Fix: Force yourself to pick within time budget - Any decision > No decision (usually)

  1. Skipping Documentation: "I'll remember later"

- Fix: Document WHILE acting, even if brief - Future you will thank present you

  1. Cowboy Decisions: Using time pressure to avoid review

- Fix: RTR still requires stating rationale - "No time to explain" is a red flag

  1. Not Following Up: Making RTR decisions permanent

- Fix: Always flag for follow-up - RTR is triage, not treatment


RTR Quality Metrics

Unlike other methodologies that optimize for decision QUALITY, RTR optimizes for:

MetricTargetMeasurement
Decision TimeWithin deadlineDid we decide in time?
Quality FloorMet minimum thresholdDid outcome meet minimum?
Reversibility PreferenceChose reversible when uncertainCould we undo if wrong?
Follow-up Rate100% get follow-upDid we revisit the decision?
Regret Rate<20%Would we decide differently with more time?

Acceptable RTR Outcome: Decision made in time, met quality floor, documented for follow-up.

RTR is NOT about making perfect decisions. It's about making good-enough decisions fast enough to matter.


Integration with Other Patterns

RTR as Starting Point:

  • RTR (triage) → HE (root cause after stabilization)
  • RTR (quick fix) → ToT (proper solution design)
  • RTR (incident) → AR (post-incident security review)

RTR Escalation: If during RTR you realize:

  • This is actually not urgent → Exit RTR, use appropriate pattern
  • This requires expertise you lack → Escalate, don't guess
  • The options all look terrible → Document and escalate

Output Template

# RTR Decision Record: [Situation]

## Constraints
- **Deadline**: [When]
- **Cost of Delay**: [What]
- **Quality Floor**: [Minimum acceptable]

## Options Considered
1. [Option A] - [Time: Xm, Reversible: Y/N]
2. [Option B] - [Time: Xm, Reversible: Y/N]
3. [Option C] - [Time: Xm, Reversible: Y/N]

## Decision
**Chosen**: [Option]
**Rationale**: [1-2 sentences]
**Confidence**: [%] (lower is expected in RTR)

## Execution
- Started: [Time]
- Checkpoints: [What happened]
- Outcome: [Result]

## Follow-up Required
- [ ] [Item 1]
- [ ] [Item 2]

## Post-Incident Review
[To be completed after crisis passes]

Version History

V1.0 (Current):

  • Initial release
  • RAPID framework (Recognize, Assess, Prioritize, Implement, Document)
  • Pre-built patterns for incidents, meetings, technical decisions
  • Time budgets for different scenarios
  • Integration points with HE, ToT, AR for follow-up

平台分布

Antigravity

27.81%
按下载量换算18

Claude Code

24.07%
按下载量换算15

Gemini CLI

19.32%
按下载量换算12

OpenCode

11.37%
按下载量换算7

windsurf

8.27%
按下载量换算5

github-copilot

3.08%
按下载量换算2

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

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。

继续浏览同类 Skills