Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 开发

rfc2119-sop-authoring(rfc2119 sop 创作)

用于辅助安全审计、权限检查、凭据风险、认证流程和常见漏洞排查。它适合让 Agent 梳理敏感配置、检查依赖风险、分析鉴权逻辑或生成安全复核清单。使用时不能把工具输出直接当最终结论,涉及密钥、令牌、用户数据或生产系统时,应先确认最小权限、脱敏方式和操作边界。

rfc2119-sop-authoring 是开发类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为只读;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描有未通过项,按安装量在开发类的 21,746 个 Skill 里排第 20,764。

总安装 212周安装 9GitHub Stars 52下载 74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:rfc2119-sop-authoring(rfc2119 sop 创作)
来源仓库:https://github.com/zenobi-us/dotfiles
仓库路径:skills/rfc2119-sop-authoring
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/zenobi-us/dotfiles --skill rfc2119-sop-authoring
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/zenobi-us/dotfiles --skill rfc2119-sop-authoring

这个 Skill 是做什么的

开发类 Skill 面向写代码、改代码和排查问题,一般会读写仓库文件,部分还会执行构建或测试命令。

rfc2119-sop-authoring 用于辅助安全审计、权限检查和认证流程排查,帮助梳理敏感配置和鉴权逻辑。适用于安全复核清单生成和常见漏洞分析场景。可通过 npx 命令从 zenobi-us/dotfiles 仓库安装,建议查看原始 README 了解具体用法。

使用时不能将工具输出直接当作最终结论,涉及密钥或生产系统时应确认最小权限和操作边界。输出内容需脱敏处理,避免暴露凭据或用户数据,优先使用模拟环境验证。

来源仓库内路径:skills/rfc2119-sop-authoring

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/zenobi-us/dotfiles --skill rfc2119-sop-authori…;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

    它标注为只读,先用只读任务试一次,确认行为符合预期再扩大使用范围。

常见问题

6 条

rfc2119-sop-authoring 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/zenobi-us/dotfiles --skill rfc2119-sop-authoring。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

rfc2119-sop-authoring 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。

rfc2119-sop-authoring 需要什么权限?

权限级别是只读。该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

rfc2119-sop-authoring 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。

rfc2119-sop-authoring 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 212 次,近一周安装 9 次,下载 74 次,GitHub 52 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。

rfc2119-sop-authoring 安全吗?

第三方扫描有未通过项,风险较高。除非你确认过源码,否则不建议直接安装到常用环境。

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。
  • 标注为只读权限,试用阶段不容易误改本地文件。

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。
  • 第三方扫描存在提醒项或未通过项,需要人工逐条确认。
  • 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。
  • 需要处理开发类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。
  • 只想先试试效果、不希望它改动本地文件的人。

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。

开发类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
skill-vetter

技能审查员 · OpenClaw

8,779,018986操作浏览器MIT-0通过
ontology

本体论 · OpenClaw

6,636,960576只读MIT-0通过
entra-app-registration

内部应用程序注册 · Codex、Claude

6,631,872764接触敏感数据未明确通过
entra-app-registration

内部应用程序注册 · Codex、Claude

3,757,680201接触敏感数据未明确通过
nano-banana-pro

纳米香蕉专业版 · OpenClaw

3,526,898364接触敏感数据MIT-0有提醒
rfc2119-sop-authoring

rfc2119 sop 创作 · 本页

21252只读未明确未通过

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

RFC 2119 SOP Authoring

Overview

Agent SOPs (Standard Operating Procedures) are markdown-based instruction sets that guide AI agents through sophisticated workflows using natural language, parameterized inputs, and RFC 2119 constraint-based execution.

Core principle: Precise control over agent behavior without rigid scripting—RFC 2119 keywords (MUST, SHOULD, MAY) provide graduated constraints that allow agents to adapt while maintaining boundaries.

When to Use

  • Creating new workflow automation SOPs
  • Structuring multi-step agent workflows with constraints
  • Converting processes into reusable parameterized templates
  • Validating existing SOP format and structure
  • Need graduated constraints (hard requirements vs recommendations vs options)

When NOT to use:

  • Simple one-shot instructions (overkill)
  • Process doesn't need parameterization (use plain documentation)
  • Requirements are binary pass/fail (simpler formats suffice)

RFC 2119 Keywords

You MUST use these keywords as defined in RFC 2119:

KeywordMeaningWhen to Use
MUST / REQUIREDAbsolute requirementHard constraints that cannot be violated
MUST NOT / SHALL NOTAbsolute prohibitionActions that would cause failure/harm
SHOULD / RECOMMENDEDStrong recommendationBest practice with valid exceptions
SHOULD NOT / NOT RECOMMENDEDStrong discouragementUsually bad but sometimes acceptable
MAY / OPTIONALTruly optionalAgent decides based on context

Required SOP Structure

Every Agent SOP MUST include these sections in order:

# [SOP Name]

## Overview
[Concise description of what the SOP does and when to use it]

## Parameters

- **required_param** (required): Description
- **optional_param** (optional, default: "value"): Description

**Constraints for parameter acquisition:**
- If all required parameters are already provided, You MUST proceed to the Steps
- If any required parameters are missing, You MUST ask for them before proceeding
- When asking for parameters, You MUST request all parameters in a single prompt
- When asking for parameters, You MUST use the exact parameter names as defined

## Steps
### 1. [Step Name]
Description of what happens in this step.

**Constraints:**
- You MUST [specific requirement]
- You SHOULD [recommended behavior]
- You MAY [optional behavior]

## Examples
[Concrete usage examples]

## Troubleshooting
[Common issues and solutions]

File Naming & Location

Naming conventions:

  • File extension: .sop.md
  • Filename: kebab-case (e.g., code-assist.sop.md, idea-honing.sop.md)
  • Descriptive names indicating purpose

Location:

  • If agent-sops/ directory exists → write there
  • Otherwise → current directory or ask user

Parameter Section Rules

Parameter format:

- **parameter_name** (required): Description of required input
- **optional_param** (optional): Description of optional input
- **with_default** (optional, default: "default_value"): Description

Parameter naming:

  • Lowercase letters only
  • Underscores for spaces (snake_case)
  • Descriptive of purpose
  • Required parameters listed before optional

Required constraints block:

**Constraints for parameter acquisition:**
- If all required parameters are already provided, You MUST proceed to the Steps
- If any required parameters are missing, You MUST ask for them before proceeding
- When asking for parameters, You MUST request all parameters in a single prompt
- When asking for parameters, You MUST use the exact parameter names as defined

Steps Section Rules

Each step MUST have:

  1. Numbered heading: ### 1. Step Name
  2. Natural language description
  3. **Constraints:** section with RFC 2119 keywords

Example step:

### 1. Setup
Initialize the project environment and create necessary structures.

**Constraints:**
- You MUST validate directory structure exists
- You MUST create missing directories
- You MUST NOT proceed if directory creation fails
- You SHOULD log all setup actions
- You MAY skip validation if --force flag is provided

Conditional logic:

### 3. Conditional Processing
If validation passes, proceed with processing. Otherwise, report errors.

**Constraints:**
- You MUST check validation status before proceeding
- If validation passes, You MUST process the data
- If validation fails, You MUST report specific errors
- You MUST NOT continue with invalid data

Negative Constraints

Always provide context for negative constraints:

✅ Good (with context):

- You MUST NOT use ellipses (...) because output will be read aloud by text-to-speech
- You SHOULD NOT delete Git history since this could corrupt the repository
- You MUST NOT run `git push` because this could publish unreviewed code

❌ Bad (without context):

- You MUST NOT use ellipses
- You SHOULD NOT delete Git files
- You MUST NOT run git push

Common contexts:

  • Technical limitations: "because the system cannot handle..."
  • Security risks: "since this could expose sensitive data..."
  • Data integrity: "as this could corrupt important information..."
  • User experience: "because users will be confused by..."
  • Performance: "as this could cause significant slowdowns..."

Validation

Run validation after EVERY change:

# From this skill's directory:
./validate-sop.sh path/to/your-sop.sop.md

You MUST fix all errors (❌) before proceeding. You SHOULD address warnings (⚠️) when possible.

Examples Section

Include concrete examples showing:

  • Input parameters
  • Expected output/behavior
  • Common usage patterns
## Examples

### Example 1: Basic Usage
**Input:**
- task_description: "Create user authentication system"
- mode: "interactive"

**Expected Behavior:**
Agent will guide through workflow, creating tests first, then implementation.

Troubleshooting Section

Include common issues and solutions:

## Troubleshooting

### Parameter Validation Fails
If parameter validation fails, check that:
- All required parameters are provided
- Parameter names use snake_case
- Values match expected types

Interactive SOPs

For SOPs requiring user interaction:

  1. Clearly indicate when user interaction is expected
  2. Specify how to handle user responses
  3. Specify where to save interaction records
### 2. Requirements Clarification
Guide the user through questions to refine their initial idea.

**Constraints:**
- You MUST ask one question at a time
- You MUST append each Q&A to "idea-honing.md"
- You SHOULD adapt follow-up questions based on previous answers
- You MUST continue until sufficient detail is gathered

Quick Reference: Validation Checklist

CheckRequirement
File extension.sop.md
TitleH1 heading present
Overview## Overview section
Parameters## Parameters with constraints block
Steps## Steps with numbered headings (### 1.)
Constraints**Constraints:** in each step
RFC 2119Uses MUST/SHOULD/MAY keywords
Negative constraintsInclude "because/since/as" context
Examples## Examples (recommended)
Troubleshooting## Troubleshooting (recommended)

Common Mistakes

Missing Parameter Constraints Block

Every Parameters section needs the acquisition constraints block—this ensures consistent behavior.

Numbered Steps Missing

Steps must be numbered: ### 1. Step Name, not ### Step Name

Negative Constraints Without Context

"You MUST NOT do X" leaves agents guessing why. Always explain the reason.

Constraints Outside Steps

Don't put RFC 2119 constraints in Overview—they belong in the **Constraints:** section within each step.

平台分布

Codex

35.91%
按下载量换算27

Claude

30.23%
按下载量换算22

Cursor

20.43%
按下载量换算15

Gemini CLI

10.98%
按下载量换算8

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

未通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

只读

该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

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。来源安全扫描存在提醒或未通过项,安装前请自行复核。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