Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

ring%3aregulatory-templates-gate2(环%3a 监管模板 gate2)

ring%3aregulatory-templates-gate2 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息,适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中需要根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果时使用。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。

ring%3aregulatory-templates-gate2 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为调用外部服务;许可证信息还不明确,暂无第三方扫描结果,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 45,360。

总安装 855周安装 36GitHub Stars 180下载 153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:ring%3aregulatory-templates-gate2(环%3a 监管模板 gate2)
来源仓库:https://github.com/lerianstudio/ring
仓库路径:skills/ring%3Aregulatory-templates-gate2
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/lerianstudio/ring --skill ring:regulatory-templates-gate2
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/lerianstudio/ring --skill ring:regulatory-templates-gate2

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

ring%3aregulatory-templates-gate2 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息。它适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中根据关键词或场景快速获取资料。可通过 npx skills add 命令从 GitHub 仓库安装,详细功能需参考原始 README。

安装前建议核实权限、维护状态及是否触发网络或命令执行。适用宿主包括 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,接入前应确认版本、权限和运行环境要求。

来源仓库内路径:skills/ring%3Aregulatory-templates-gate2

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/lerianstudio/ring --skill ring:regulatory-temp…;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

    它需要调用外部服务,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

ring%3aregulatory-templates-gate2 怎么安装?

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

ring%3aregulatory-templates-gate2 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。

ring%3aregulatory-templates-gate2 需要什么权限?

权限级别是调用外部服务。该 Skill 可能调用第三方服务、云服务或外部模型 API,使用前需要确认账号、额度、数据发送范围和服务条款。

ring%3aregulatory-templates-gate2 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。

ring%3aregulatory-templates-gate2 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 855 次,近一周安装 36 次,下载 153 次,GitHub 180 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。

ring%3aregulatory-templates-gate2 安全吗?

没有查到第三方扫描结果,安全性无法从公开资料判断,安装前请自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。

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。

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。
  • 没有第三方扫描结果,安全性只能靠自己读源码判断。
  • 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。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、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。
  • 要求有安全扫描结论才肯安装的团队。
  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
ring%3aregulatory-templates-gate2

环%3a 监管模板 gate2 · 本页

855180调用外部服务未明确未收录

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

Regulatory Templates - Gate 2: Technical Validation

Overview

This sub-skill executes Gate 2 of the regulatory template workflow: validating uncertain mappings from Gate 1 and confirming all field specifications through testing.

Parent skill: regulatory-templates

Prerequisites:

  • Gate 1 PASSED
  • Context object with Gate 1 results

Output: Validated mappings with test results and validation rules


Foundational Principle

Validation is the checkpoint that prevents incorrect mappings from reaching production.

Gate 2 is the quality gate between analysis (Gate 1) and implementation (Gate 3):

  • All uncertainties resolved: Gate 1 analysis ≠ Gate 2 validation. MEDIUM/LOW uncertainties often hide critical issues
  • 100% mandatory validation: 95% = 5% of mandatory data could be wrong in BACEN submission
  • >90% test pass rate: Test data reveals transformation bugs, data type mismatches, edge cases
  • Confirmed mappings: Prevents Gate 3 from generating templates based on assumptions
  • Validation rules defined: Gate 3 needs explicit validation logic for template generation

Skipping validation in Gate 2 means:

  • Gate 1 assumptions become Gate 3 implementation (no verification layer)
  • Uncertainties propagate to production (BACEN submission failures)
  • Low-confidence mappings generate incorrect templates (compliance violations)
  • No test data validation = edge cases break in production

Gate 2 is not redundant - it's the firewall between analysis and implementation.


When to Use

Called by: regulatory-templates skill after Gate 1 passes

Purpose: Resolve uncertainties, validate field mappings, test transformations, define validation rules


NO EXCEPTIONS - Validation Requirements Are Mandatory

Gate 2 validation requirements have ZERO exceptions. This is the quality firewall before template generation.

Common Pressures You Must Resist

PressureYour ThoughtReality
Pragmatism"Critical uncertainties only, skip MEDIUM/LOW"PASS criteria: ALL uncertainties resolved. MEDIUM/LOW cascade to mandatory failures
Efficiency"88% test pass rate is excellent"Threshold is >90%. 12% failure = edge cases that break in production
Complexity"Validation dashboard is redundant"Mandatory validation = 100% required. Dashboard catches missing validations
Confidence"Mappings look correct, skip testing"Visual inspection ≠ test validation. Test data reveals hidden bugs
Authority"95% mandatory validation is outstanding"100% is non-negotiable. 5% gap = 5% of mandatory data wrong in BACEN
Frustration"Use workarounds for rejected fields"FAIL criteria: Cannot find alternatives. Workarounds bypass validation

Validation Requirements (Non-Negotiable)

All Uncertainties Resolved:

  • ✅ REQUIRED: Resolve ALL Gate 1 uncertainties (CRITICAL + MEDIUM + LOW)
  • ❌ FORBIDDEN: "Fix critical only", "Skip low-priority items"
  • Why: MEDIUM/LOW uncertainties often reveal systemic issues, cascade to mandatory failures

Test Data Validation:

  • ✅ REQUIRED: Test pass rate >90%
  • ❌ FORBIDDEN: "88% is close enough", "Skip testing, looks correct"
  • Why: Test data reveals transformation bugs, data type mismatches, edge cases

Mandatory Field Validation:

  • ✅ REQUIRED: 100% mandatory fields validated
  • ❌ FORBIDDEN: "95% is outstanding", "Edge cases don't matter"
  • Why: Each 1% gap = potential BACEN submission failure on mandatory data

Alternative Mappings:

  • ✅ REQUIRED: Find alternatives for ALL rejected fields
  • ❌ FORBIDDEN: "Use workarounds", "Keep original with patches"
  • Why: Rejected mappings fail validation for a reason - workarounds bypass the firewall

The Bottom Line

Partial validation = no validation.

Gate 2 exists to catch what Gate 1 missed. Lowering thresholds or skipping validation defeats the purpose. Every PASS criterion exists because production incidents occurred without it.

If you're tempted to skip ANY validation, ask yourself: Am I willing to defend this shortcut during a BACEN audit?


Rationalization Table - Know the Excuses

Every rationalization below has been used to justify skipping validation. ALL are invalid.

ExcuseWhy It's WrongCorrect Response
"Critical uncertainties only, MEDIUM/LOW can wait"ALL uncertainties = all 8. MEDIUM cascade to mandatory failuresResolve ALL uncertainties
"88% is excellent, 2% gap is edge cases">90% threshold exists for production edge casesFix to reach >90%
"Validation dashboard is redundant with Gate 1"Gate 1 = mapping, Gate 2 = validation. Different purposesRun dashboard, ensure 100%
"Mappings look correct, testing is busywork"Visual inspection missed bugs testing would catchRun test data validation
"95% is outstanding, 5% isn't worth 2 hours"100% is binary requirement. 95% ≠ 100%Fix to reach 100%
"Rejected fields can use workarounds"Workarounds bypass validation layerFind valid alternatives
"Gate 2 rarely finds issues after 50 templates"Experience doesn't exempt from validationRun full validation
"Following spirit not letter"Validation thresholds ARE the spiritMeet all thresholds
"Being pragmatic vs dogmatic"Thresholds prevent regulatory incidentsRigor is pragmatism
"Fix in next sprint if issues arise"Regulatory submissions are final, can't patchFix now before Gate 3

If You Find Yourself Making These Excuses

STOP. You are rationalizing.

The validation exists to prevent these exact thoughts from allowing errors into production. If validation seems "redundant," that's evidence it's working - catching what analysis missed.


Gate 2 Process

Check for Template-Specific Validation Rules

Check for template-specific sub-skill at skills/regulatory-{template}/SKILL.md containing:

  • Validation rules (VR001, VR002...), business rules (BR001, BR002...)
  • Format rules, test data with expected outputs

Agent Dispatch with Gate 1 Context

Dispatch: Task(subagent_type: "ring:finops-analyzer")

CRITICAL: ⚠️ DO NOT MAKE MCP API CALLS - use Gate 1 context ONLY

Prompt structure:

SectionContent
ContextFull Gate 1 context (field mappings, uncertainties)
Uncertain MappingsFor each: field_code, current_mapping, doubt, confidence, action_needed
Validation Tasks1. Use Gate 1 mapping 2. Validate transformations 3. Check business logic 4. Confirm data types 5. Mark CONFIRMED/REJECTED
OutputPer field: code, resolution, alternative (if rejected), test_result

Output: Field resolutions + validation rules + cross-field logic + test data


Validation Process

⚠️ All validation uses Gate 1 context ONLY - no MCP API calls.

1. Field Validation

Per uncertain field: field_code, original_doubt, validation_steps (5), resolution (confirmed/rejected), transformation, test_data (input/expected/actual/status)

2. Validation Rules Definition

Rule TypeExampleFormula
field_formatCNPJ 8 digitslength(field_001) == 8
cross_fieldCPF/CNPJ checklength(field_001) IN (11, 14)
date_rangeWithin periodfield_020 >= period_start AND field_020 <= period_end

3. Test Results Documentation

Per test: field, test_name, input, transformation, output, expected, passed (true/false)

Example: Field 001 CNPJ extraction: "12345678000190" → slice:':8' → "12345678" ✓


Capture Gate 2 Response

Merge with Gate 1: validated_mappings[], validation_rules[], all_uncertainties_resolved, test_summary (total/passed/failed/success_rate)


Red Flags - STOP Immediately

If you catch yourself thinking ANY of these, STOP and re-read the NO EXCEPTIONS section:

Partial Resolution

  • "Resolve critical only, skip MEDIUM/LOW"
  • "Fix most uncertainties, good enough"
  • "ALL is unrealistic, most is pragmatic"

Threshold Degradation

  • "88% is close to 90%"
  • "95% mandatory validation is outstanding"
  • "Close enough to pass"
  • "The gap isn't material"

Skip Validation Steps

  • "Validation dashboard is redundant"
  • "Mappings look correct visually"
  • "Testing is busywork"
  • "We'll catch issues in Gate 3"

Workaround Thinking

  • "Use workarounds for rejected fields"
  • "Patch it in Gate 3"
  • "Fix in next sprint"
  • "This is an edge case"

Justification Language

  • "Being pragmatic"
  • "Following spirit not letter"
  • "Outstanding is good enough"
  • "Rarely finds issues anyway"
  • "Experience says this is fine"

If You See These Red Flags

  1. Acknowledge the rationalization ("I'm trying to skip LOW uncertainties")
  2. Read the NO EXCEPTIONS section (understand why ALL means ALL)
  3. Read the Rationalization Table (see your exact excuse refuted)
  4. Meet the threshold completely (100%, >90%, ALL)

Validation thresholds are binary gates, not aspirational goals.



Severity Calibration

MUST classify validation issues using these severity levels:

SeverityDefinitionExamplesGate Impact
CRITICALBLOCKS Gate 2 completion OR creates compliance risk- Mandatory field mapping rejected with no alternative- Test failure rate > 50%- Cross-field validation logic broken- Data type mismatch on mandatory fieldHARD BLOCK - Cannot proceed to Gate 3
HIGHREQUIRES resolution before Gate 3 OR risks submission failure- Test pass rate 80-90% (below threshold)- MEDIUM uncertainty unresolved- Transformation validation failed- Validation rule missing for mandatory fieldMUST resolve before proceeding
MEDIUMSHOULD fix to improve template quality- Test pass rate 90-95%- LOW uncertainty unresolved- Optional field transformation issues- Documentation incomplete for validationSHOULD resolve - document if deferred
LOWMinor improvements possible- Edge case validation could be enhanced- Test coverage improvements- Documentation clarityOPTIONAL - note in report

Classification Rules:

CRITICAL = ANY of:

  • Mandatory field cannot be validated (no source, no alternative)
  • Test pass rate < 80%
  • Cross-field validation logic fundamentally broken
  • Data type cannot be transformed to required format

HIGH = ANY of:

  • Test pass rate 80-90% (below >90% threshold)
  • Any uncertainty unresolved (MEDIUM or LOW)
  • Validation rule cannot be defined for mandatory field
  • Transformation produces inconsistent results

Cannot Be Overridden

NON-NEGOTIABLE requirements (no exceptions, no user override):

RequirementWhy NON-NEGOTIABLEVerification
100% Mandatory Field ValidationBACEN/RFB submissions reject incomplete dataAll mandatory fields in validated_mappings
ALL Uncertainties ResolvedUnresolved uncertainties = assumptions in productionuncertainties_resolved == 100%
>90% Test Pass RateTest failures indicate production edge casestest_success_rate > 90%
Alternative for Every RejectionRejected mapping with no alternative = broken templaterejected_fields.all.have_alternative
Validation Rules DefinedGate 3 needs explicit validation logicvalidation_rules_count >= mandatory_fields_count

User CANNOT:

  • Lower test pass rate threshold ("88% is close enough" = NO)
  • Skip MEDIUM/LOW uncertainties ("fix critical only" = NO)
  • Accept missing alternatives ("workaround in Gate 3" = NO)
  • Proceed with <100% mandatory validation ("95% is outstanding" = NO)
  • Defer validation rules ("Gate 3 will figure it out" = NO)

Your Response to Override Attempts:

"I CANNOT proceed with [request]. Gate 2 PASS criteria require [specific threshold]. This is NON-NEGOTIABLE because [regulatory/technical reason]. We MUST [required action] before proceeding to Gate 3."

Pass/Fail Criteria

PASS Criteria

  • ✅ All Gate 1 uncertainties resolved (confirmed or alternatives found)
  • ✅ Test data validates successfully (>90% pass rate)
  • ✅ No new Critical/High issues
  • ✅ All mandatory fields have confirmed mappings
  • ✅ Validation rules defined for all critical fields

FAIL Criteria

  • ❌ Uncertainties remain unresolved
  • ❌ Test failures on mandatory fields
  • ❌ Cannot find alternative mappings for rejected fields
  • ❌ Data type mismatches that can't be transformed
  • ❌ Mandatory fields validation < 100%

Mandatory Fields Final Validation

CRITICAL: Execute before Gate 2 completion

Per mandatory field, check:

  • mapped (in gate1.field_mappings)
  • confidence_ok (≥80%)
  • validated (in gate2.validated_mappings)
  • tested (in gate2.test_results)
  • transformation_ok (works correctly)

Status: All checks PASS → field PASS; any FAIL → field FAIL

Gate 2 Pass Condition: all_mandatory_fields_valid == true required. Coverage must be 100%.


State Tracking

PASS: SKILL: regulatory-templates-gate2 | GATE: 2 | STATUS: PASSED | RESOLVED: {n} uncertainties | RULES: {n} defined | TESTS: {passed}/{total} | NEXT: → Gate 3

FAIL: SKILL: regulatory-templates-gate2 | GATE: 2 | STATUS: FAILED | UNRESOLVED: {n} | TEST_FAILURES: {n} | BLOCKERS: {description}


Technical Validation Checklist

CategoryValidations
Field Namingsnake_case (not camelCase), check MCP API Dog naming
Data TypesString (length, UTF-8), Number (precision), Date (format), Boolean, Enum
TransformationsCNPJ/CPF slice, date timezone, decimal format, string trim/uppercase/padding, null defaults
Cross-FieldDependent consistency, date ranges, calculated fields, conditional logic

Common Validation Patterns

PatternInput → Transformation → Output
CNPJ extraction"12345678000190" → slice:':8' → "12345678"
Date format"2025-01-15T10:30:00Z" → date_format:'%Y/%m' → "2025/01"
Decimal precision1234.5678 → floatformat:2 → "1234.57"
ConditionaltipoRemessa == "I" → include all; "S" → approved only

Output to Parent Skill

Return: gate2_passed, gate2_context (merged), all_uncertainties_resolved, validation_rules_count, test_success_rate, next_action (proceed_to_gate3 | fix_validations_and_retry)

平台分布

Codex

39.25%
按下载量换算60

Claude

27.03%
按下载量换算41

Cursor

18.88%
按下载量换算29

Gemini CLI

9.4%
按下载量换算14

安全审计

暂无安全审计结果可展示。

权限和风险

调用外部服务

该 Skill 可能调用第三方服务、云服务或外部模型 API,使用前需要确认账号、额度、数据发送范围和服务条款。

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