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

rfc射频卡

Agent Skill

rfc 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

238

周安装

10

GitHub Stars

公开资料未说明

下载量

83
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:rfc(射频卡)
来源仓库:https://github.com/andresnator/agents-orchestrator
仓库路径:skills/rfc
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/andresnator/agents-orchestrator --skill rfc
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/andresnator/agents-orchestrator --skill rfc

简介

rfc 用于处理 GitHub 仓库、Issue 和 Pull Request 协作信息,适合围绕代码变更进行整理。

  • 适用于开发流程中的仓库状态跟踪和协作事项管理。
  • 可通过 npx 命令从 agents-orchestrator 仓库安装,建议查看原始 README 了解具体能力。
  • 使用前需确认权限范围和维护状态,避免误操作私有仓库或敏感提交。
  • 输出信息应以公开协作数据为基础,不擅自推断内部设计或未发布功能。

SKILL.md

RFC Creator — Interactive Interview & Markdown Generator

Overview

This skill creates professional RFC (Request for Comments) documents by guiding the user through a structured interview. Instead of asking the user to fill in a template, the agent conducts a conversational interview, collecting information piece by piece, and then assembles a polished Markdown RFC at the end.

The goal is to make writing an RFC feel like a conversation, not paperwork.

Interview Flow

The interview has 7 phases. Walk the user through them one at a time. After each phase, summarize what you captured and confirm before moving on. Use the ask_user_input tool when the question has clear bounded options; use open-ended prose questions for everything else.

Important behavioral notes:

  • Ask one phase at a time. Do not dump all questions at once.
  • After the user answers, briefly reflect back what you understood and confirm it before proceeding.
  • If the user gives a vague answer, ask a clarifying follow-up — but don't be annoying about it. One follow-up is enough; if they're still vague, work with what you have.
  • If the user says "skip" or "not sure yet" for any section, mark it as TBD in the final document and move on.
  • The user can say "go back" at any time to revise a previous section.

Phase 1: Identity & Metadata

Collect the basic metadata for the RFC header.

Ask (open-ended):

  • Feature name: "What's the name or short identifier for this proposal? (e.g., async-worker-pool, user-auth-v2SI)"
  • Author(s): "Who are the authors? (names or handles)"

Then ask (using ask_user_input):

  • Type: single_select from ["Feature", "Enhancement", "Bug Fix", "Deprecation", "Process Change", "Other"]
  • Status: single_select from ["Draft", "In Review", "Accepted", "Rejected", "Superseded"]

Auto-fill the start date with today's date.

Phase 2: Related Context

Ask (open-ended):

  • "Are there related components, services, or systems this affects?"
  • "Any related tickets, issues, or prior RFCs to reference? (JIRA, GitHub issues, links, etc.)"

These are optional — if the user has nothing, skip gracefully.

Phase 3: Summary

Ask (open-ended):

  • "Give me a one-paragraph summary of this proposal. What is it, at a high level?"

If the user gives a long explanation, distill it to a concise paragraph and confirm: "Here's how I'd summarize that — does this capture it?"

Phase 4: Motivation

Ask (open-ended):

  • "Why is this needed? What problem does it solve or what use case does it support?"
  • "What happens if we don't do this?"

These two answers get combined into the Motivation section.

Phase 5: Detailed Design

This is the meatiest section. Approach it conversationally:

  • "Walk me through the design. How would this work?"
  • Follow up with clarifying questions based on what they describe:

- "How does X interact with Y?" - "What happens in the edge case where...?" - "Can you give me a concrete example of how a user/developer would use this?"

If the user provides code snippets, diagrams (in text), or API shapes, include them in the final RFC as fenced code blocks.

Encourage specificity, but respect the user's level of detail. Not every RFC needs to be an implementation spec — some are directional.

Phase 6: Trade-offs & Alternatives

Ask (using ask_user_input for the first, open-ended for the rest):

  • Have you considered alternatives?: single_select ["Yes, I have specific alternatives", "I have some rough ideas", "No, I haven't thought about it yet"]

Then depending on their answer:

  • If they have alternatives: "What alternatives did you consider and why did you choose this approach over them?"
  • If rough ideas: "Tell me what you've got — even half-formed ideas are useful to capture."
  • If none: "That's fine. Let me ask it differently — what's the main drawback or risk of this proposal?"

Also ask:

  • "What are the drawbacks of this approach? Why might someone argue against it?"

Phase 7: Open Questions

Ask (open-ended):

  • "What parts of this design are still unresolved or need further discussion?"
  • "Is there anything you're specifically looking for feedback on?"

Generating the RFC

Once all phases are complete (or the user says "that's everything"), generate the RFC as a Markdown file.

Output Template

Read the template at references/template.md and use that exact structure for the generated .md file.

File Generation Rules

  1. Save the file as rfc-[feature-id].md where [feature-id] is the kebab-case version of the feature name.
  2. Write the file to /mnt/user-data/outputs/.
  3. Use present_files to share it with the user.
  4. After presenting, offer: "Want me to adjust anything? I can also add extra sections like Implementation Plan, Timeline, or Security Considerations if you need them."

Writing Quality

When assembling the RFC from the interview answers:

  • Smooth out the language so it reads as a cohesive document, not a Q&A transcript.
  • Expand terse answers into clear prose while preserving the user's intent.
  • Preserve any technical detail, code, or examples verbatim.
  • Use professional but approachable tone — an RFC should be clear and direct, not stuffy.
  • If the user marked anything as TBD, include a visible > **TBD**: [brief note] callout so reviewers know it's intentionally unresolved.

Optional Extended Sections

If the user requests them (or if they naturally come up during the interview), the RFC can include additional sections after "Unresolved Questions":

  • Implementation Plan: Phases, milestones, estimated effort.
  • Timeline: Target dates for review, implementation, rollout.
  • Security Considerations: Threat model, auth implications, data handling.
  • Testing Strategy: How this will be validated.
  • Rollback Plan: How to revert if things go wrong.
  • Migration Plan: Steps for transitioning from the current state.

Only include these if the user wants them — don't bloat the RFC.

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

35.89%
按下载量换算30

Claude

29.9%
按下载量换算25

Cursor

20.02%
按下载量换算17

Gemini CLI

9.01%
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

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。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