Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

self-improving-engineering(自我完善工程)

self-improving-engineering 用于记录任务执行中的错误、用户纠正、经验和能力缺口,适合在 OpenClaw 中希望让 Agent 持续沉淀问题、修正和最佳实践时使用。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。

self-improving-engineering 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 OpenClaw,通过ClawHub获取,权限为接触敏感数据;许可证为 MIT-0,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 30,145。

总安装 2,928周安装 122GitHub Stars 公开资料未说明下载 976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-0
版本
1.2.1

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:self-improving-engineering(自我完善工程)
来源仓库:https://github.com/jose-compu/self-improving-engineering
安装命令:
openclaw skills install self-improving-engineering
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 OpenClaw 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。

ClawHubOpenClaw
openclaw skills install self-improving-engineering

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。

用于捕获架构决策失误、构建失败与依赖冲突等工程实践中的关键教训。适用于软件开发、部署运维与技术债务管理等领域。通过系统化记录工程问题,提升代理在复杂系统开发中的可靠性。安装命令:openclaw skills install self-improving-engineering,需确认是否调用 CI/CD 工具。

建议结合项目阶段使用,避免过早引入学习负担。

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 OpenClaw;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 openclaw skills install self-improving-engineering;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

    它需要接触敏感数据,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

self-improving-engineering 怎么安装?

在终端执行 openclaw skills install self-improving-engineering。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

self-improving-engineering 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 OpenClaw。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。

self-improving-engineering 需要什么权限?

权限级别是接触敏感数据。该 Skill 可能接触密钥、Token、环境变量或敏感配置,应进入高风险复核队列,默认不自动发布。

self-improving-engineering 是免费的吗?

来源标注的许可证是 MIT-0。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。

self-improving-engineering 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 2,928 次,近一周安装 122 次,下载 976 次。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。

self-improving-engineering 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

  • 专注 OpenClaw 一种宿主,触发方式和使用习惯不用来回切换。
  • 许可证明确为 MIT-0,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

  • 需要接触敏感数据,装到常用环境前要先评估影响面。
  • 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 OpenClaw,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。
  • 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

  • 环境里有大量密钥、凭证,不方便给第三方 Skill 读取的人。
  • 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
self-improving-engineering

自我完善工程 · 本页

2,928—接触敏感数据MIT-0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

name
self-improving-engineering
description
Captures architecture decisions, code quality issues, build/deploy failures, dependency problems, performance regressions, tech debt accumulation, and test gaps for continuous engineering improvement. Use when: (1) A build or deployment fails, (2) An architecture violation is discovered, (3) A test gap or flaky test is found, (4) A dependency CVE or breaking change surfaces, (5) A performance regression is detected, (6) Code review reveals design flaws, (7) Tech debt accumulates past a threshold.
metadata

Self-Improving Engineering Skill

Log engineering learnings, issues, and feature requests to markdown files for continuous improvement. Captures architecture decisions, build failures, test gaps, performance regressions, dependency problems, and code quality issues. Important learnings get promoted to architecture decision records, coding standards, and CI/CD runbooks.

First-Use Initialisation

Before logging anything, ensure the .learnings/ directory and files exist in the project or workspace root. If any are missing, create them:

mkdir -p .learnings
[ -f .learnings/LEARNINGS.md ] || printf "# Engineering Learnings\
\
Architecture decisions, code quality insights, and engineering knowledge captured during development.\
\
**Categories**: architecture_debt | code_smell | performance_regression | dependency_issue | testing_gap | design_flaw\
**Areas**: design | implementation | code_review | ci_cd | deployment | monitoring\
\
---\
" > .learnings/LEARNINGS.md
[ -f .learnings/ENGINEERING_ISSUES.md ] || printf "# Engineering Issues Log\
\
Build failures, deployment errors, performance regressions, and infrastructure problems.\
\
---\
" > .learnings/ENGINEERING_ISSUES.md
[ -f .learnings/FEATURE_REQUESTS.md ] || printf "# Feature Requests\
\
Engineering capabilities, tooling improvements, and infrastructure enhancements requested during development.\
\
---\
" > .learnings/FEATURE_REQUESTS.md

Never overwrite existing files. This is a no-op if .learnings/ is already initialised.

Do not log secrets, tokens, private keys, environment variables, or full config files unless the user explicitly asks for that level of detail. Prefer short summaries or redacted excerpts over raw command output or full stack traces.

Use a manual-first workflow by default. If you want reminders, use the opt-in hook workflow described in Hook Integration.

Quick Reference

SituationAction
Build fails (CI or local)Log to .learnings/ENGINEERING_ISSUES.md with build context
Architecture violation discoveredLog to .learnings/LEARNINGS.md with category architecture_debt
Test flake or gap identifiedLog to .learnings/LEARNINGS.md with category testing_gap
Dependency CVE or breaking changeLog to .learnings/ENGINEERING_ISSUES.md with dependency details
Performance regression detectedLog to .learnings/ENGINEERING_ISSUES.md with metrics/benchmarks
Code smell found during reviewLog to .learnings/LEARNINGS.md with category code_smell
Design flaw surfacesLog to .learnings/LEARNINGS.md with category design_flaw
User requests engineering capabilityLog to .learnings/FEATURE_REQUESTS.md
Deployment rollback triggeredLog to .learnings/ENGINEERING_ISSUES.md with rollback reason
N+1 query or slow path foundLog to .learnings/LEARNINGS.md with category performance_regression
Similar to existing entryLink with **See Also**, consider priority bump
Broadly applicable patternPromote to ADR, coding standards, or CI/CD runbook
Design pattern proven in practicePromote to SOUL.md (OpenClaw workspace)
CI/CD workflow improvementPromote to AGENTS.md (OpenClaw workspace)
Build tool or infra gotchaPromote to TOOLS.md (OpenClaw workspace)

OpenClaw Setup (Recommended)

OpenClaw is the primary platform for this skill. It uses workspace-based prompt injection with automatic skill loading.

Installation

Via ClawdHub (recommended):

clawdhub install self-improving-engineering

Manual:

git clone https://github.com/jose-compu/self-improving-engineering.git ~/.openclaw/skills/self-improving-engineering

Workspace Structure

OpenClaw injects these files into every session:

~/.openclaw/workspace/
├── AGENTS.md          # CI/CD workflows, deployment patterns, multi-agent coordination
├── SOUL.md            # Design principles, architecture guidelines, coding standards
├── TOOLS.md           # Build tools, test frameworks, dependency managers, infra gotchas
├── MEMORY.md          # Long-term memory (main session only)
├── memory/            # Daily memory files
│   └── YYYY-MM-DD.md
└── .learnings/        # This skill's log files
    ├── LEARNINGS.md
    ├── ENGINEERING_ISSUES.md
    └── FEATURE_REQUESTS.md

Create Learning Files

mkdir -p ~/.openclaw/workspace/.learnings

Then create the log files (or copy from assets/):

  • LEARNINGS.md — architecture decisions, code quality insights, design patterns
  • ENGINEERING_ISSUES.md — build failures, deploy errors, performance regressions
  • FEATURE_REQUESTS.md — tooling improvements, infrastructure enhancements

Promotion Targets

When learnings prove broadly applicable, promote them to workspace files:

Learning TypePromote ToExample
Design patterns & principlesSOUL.md"Prefer composition over inheritance for service layer"
CI/CD workflows & deploy patternsAGENTS.md"Run migration check before deploy"
Build tool & infra gotchasTOOLS.md"Node 20 breaks native modules; pin to 18 LTS"

Optional: Enable Hook

For lightweight reminders at session start (recommended: activator only):

cp -r hooks/openclaw ~/.openclaw/hooks/self-improving-engineering
openclaw hooks enable self-improving-engineering

See references/openclaw-integration.md for complete details.


Generic Setup (Other Agents)

For Claude Code, Codex, Copilot, or other agents, create .learnings/ in the project or workspace root:

mkdir -p .learnings

Create the files inline using the headers shown above. Avoid reading templates from the current repo or workspace unless you explicitly trust that path.

Add reference to agent files AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, or .github/copilot-instructions.md to remind yourself to log engineering learnings. (this is an alternative to hook-based reminders)

Self-Improving Engineering Workflow

When engineering issues or architectural discoveries occur:

  1. Log to .learnings/ENGINEERING_ISSUES.md, LEARNINGS.md, or FEATURE_REQUESTS.md
  2. Review and promote broadly applicable learnings to:

- Architecture Decision Records (ADRs) in docs/decisions/ - Coding standards in CLAUDE.md or .github/copilot-instructions.md - CI/CD runbooks in AGENTS.md

Logging Format

Learning Entry

Append to .learnings/LEARNINGS.md:

## [LRN-YYYYMMDD-XXX] category

**Logged**: ISO-8601 timestamp
**Priority**: low | medium | high | critical
**Status**: pending
**Area**: design | implementation | code_review | ci_cd | deployment | monitoring

### Summary
One-line description of the engineering learning

### Details
Full context: what was discovered, why it matters, what the correct approach is

### Suggested Action
Specific fix, refactoring step, or architectural change to make

### Metadata
- Source: build_failure | test_failure | code_review | deployment | monitoring | investigation
- Category: architecture_debt | code_smell | performance_regression | dependency_issue | testing_gap | design_flaw
- Related Files: path/to/file.ext
- Tags: tag1, tag2
- See Also: LRN-20250110-001 (if related to existing entry)
- Pattern-Key: arch.circular_dependency | perf.n_plus_one | test.missing_integration (optional)
- Recurrence-Count: 1 (optional)
- First-Seen: 2025-01-15 (optional)
- Last-Seen: 2025-01-15 (optional)

---

Categories:

  • architecture_debt — coupling, circular dependencies, layer violations, missing abstractions
  • code_smell — long methods, god classes, feature envy, primitive obsession
  • performance_regression — N+1 queries, memory leaks, slow endpoints, missing indexes
  • dependency_issue — CVEs, version conflicts, breaking upgrades, deprecated packages
  • testing_gap — missing integration tests, untested edge cases, flaky tests
  • design_flaw — wrong pattern choice, API contract issues, data model problems

Engineering Issue Entry

Append to .learnings/ENGINEERING_ISSUES.md:

## [ENG-YYYYMMDD-XXX] issue_type

**Logged**: ISO-8601 timestamp
**Priority**: high
**Status**: pending
**Area**: design | implementation | code_review | ci_cd | deployment | monitoring

### Summary
Brief description of the engineering issue

### Error

Actual error message, build output, or test failure


### Context
- Build/deploy step that failed
- Environment details (CI runner, Node version, OS)
- Input or configuration that triggered the issue
- Summary or redacted excerpt of relevant output

### Impact
What is blocked or degraded by this issue

### Suggested Fix
If identifiable, what might resolve this

### Metadata
- Reproducible: yes | no | unknown
- Environment: local | ci | staging | production
- Related Files: path/to/file.ext
- See Also: ENG-20250110-001 (if recurring)

---

Feature Request Entry

Append to .learnings/FEATURE_REQUESTS.md:

## [FEAT-YYYYMMDD-XXX] capability_name

**Logged**: ISO-8601 timestamp
**Priority**: medium
**Status**: pending
**Area**: design | implementation | code_review | ci_cd | deployment | monitoring

### Requested Capability
What engineering capability or tooling improvement is needed

### Engineering Context
Why this is needed, what pain point it addresses, what breaks without it

### Complexity Estimate
simple | medium | complex

### Suggested Implementation
Architecture approach, libraries to evaluate, integration points

### Metadata
- Frequency: first_time | recurring
- Related Features: existing_feature_name

---

ID Generation

Format: TYPE-YYYYMMDD-XXX

  • TYPE: LRN (learning), ENG (engineering issue), FEAT (feature request)
  • YYYYMMDD: Current date
  • XXX: Sequential number or random 3 chars (e.g., 001, A7B)

Examples: LRN-20250115-001, ENG-20250115-A3F, FEAT-20250115-002

Resolving Entries

When an issue is fixed, update the entry:

  1. Change **Status**: pending → **Status**: resolved
  2. Add resolution block after Metadata:
### Resolution
- **Resolved**: 2025-01-16T09:00:00Z
- **Commit/PR**: abc123 or #42
- **Root Cause**: Brief description of actual root cause
- **Notes**: What was done and any follow-up needed

Other status values:

  • in_progress — Actively being worked on
  • wont_fix — Decided not to address (add reason in Resolution notes)
  • promoted — Elevated to ADR, coding standard, or CI/CD runbook
  • promoted_to_skill — Extracted as a reusable skill

Promoting to Project Memory

When a learning is broadly applicable (not a one-off fix), promote it to permanent project memory.

When to Promote

  • Learning applies across multiple services or modules
  • Knowledge any engineer (human or AI) should know about the codebase
  • Prevents recurring build failures or deployment issues
  • Documents architecture decisions and their rationale
  • Establishes a coding standard or testing requirement

Promotion Targets

TargetWhat Belongs There
docs/decisions/ADR-NNN.mdArchitecture decisions with context and consequences
CLAUDE.mdProject facts, build conventions, gotchas for all Claude interactions
AGENTS.mdCI/CD workflows, deployment patterns, automation rules
.github/copilot-instructions.mdProject context and conventions for GitHub Copilot
SOUL.mdDesign principles, coding philosophy, architecture guidelines (OpenClaw)
TOOLS.mdBuild tools, test frameworks, dependency manager gotchas (OpenClaw)
.github/CODING_STANDARDS.mdTeam coding standards and conventions

How to Promote

  1. Distill the learning into a concise rule, ADR, or standard
  2. Add to appropriate section in target file (create file if needed)
  3. Update original entry:

- Change **Status**: pending → **Status**: promoted - Add **Promoted**: docs/decisions/ADR-007.md or target file

Promotion Examples

Learning (verbose):

Discovered circular dependency between UserService and AuthService. UserService imports AuthService for token validation, AuthService imports UserService for user lookup. Causes test isolation failures and makes both services untestable independently.

As ADR (concise):

# ADR-007: Break circular service dependencies with event bus

## Status: Accepted

## Context
UserService and AuthService have circular imports causing test isolation failures.

## Decision
Use an event bus for cross-service communication. Services publish events instead of direct imports.

## Consequences
- Services become independently testable
- Adds event bus infrastructure dependency
- Requires eventual consistency for cross-service queries

Recurring Pattern Detection

If logging something similar to an existing entry:

  1. Search first: grep -r "keyword" .learnings/
  2. Link entries: Add **See Also**: ENG-20250110-001 in Metadata
  3. Bump priority if issue keeps recurring
  4. Consider systemic fix: Recurring issues often indicate:

- Flaky tests → missing test isolation or shared state (→ coding standard) - Repeated build failures → missing CI validation step (→ CI/CD runbook) - Recurring dependency conflicts → missing lockfile discipline (→ TOOLS.md) - Architecture violations keep appearing → missing fitness functions (→ ADR) - Same code smell in multiple PRs → missing linter rule (→ .eslintrc or coding standard)

Simplify & Harden Feed

Use this workflow to ingest recurring engineering patterns from the simplify-and-harden skill and turn them into durable engineering guidance.

Ingestion Workflow

  1. Read simplify_and_harden.learning_loop.candidates from the task summary.
  2. For each candidate, use pattern_key as the stable dedupe key.
  3. Search .learnings/LEARNINGS.md for an existing entry with that key:

- grep -n "Pattern-Key: <pattern_key>" .learnings/LEARNINGS.md

  1. If found:

- Increment Recurrence-Count - Update Last-Seen - Add See Also links to related entries/tasks

  1. If not found:

- Create a new LRN-... entry - Set Source: simplify-and-harden - Set Pattern-Key, Recurrence-Count: 1, and First-Seen/Last-Seen

Promotion Rule (System Prompt Feedback)

Promote recurring patterns into agent context/system prompt files when all are true:

  • Recurrence-Count >= 3
  • Seen across at least 2 distinct tasks or services
  • Occurred within a 30-day window

Promotion targets:

  • CLAUDE.md
  • AGENTS.md
  • .github/copilot-instructions.md
  • SOUL.md / TOOLS.md for OpenClaw workspace-level guidance when applicable

Write promoted rules as short prevention rules (what to check before/while coding), not long incident write-ups.

Periodic Review

Review .learnings/ at natural engineering breakpoints:

When to Review

  • Before cutting a release or deploying to production
  • After a production incident or rollback
  • During sprint retrospectives
  • When onboarding to a new service or module
  • After dependency upgrades or migration work

Quick Status Check

# Count pending engineering items
grep -h "Status\*\*: pending" .learnings/*.md | wc -l

# List pending high-priority items
grep -B5 "Priority\*\*: high" .learnings/*.md | grep "^## \["

# Find learnings for a specific area
grep -l "Area\*\*: ci_cd" .learnings/*.md

# Find all architecture debt entries
grep -B2 "Category.*architecture_debt" .learnings/LEARNINGS.md | grep "^## \["

Review Actions

  • Resolve fixed items
  • Promote applicable learnings to ADRs or coding standards
  • Link related entries
  • Escalate recurring issues to tech debt backlog
  • Create follow-up tickets for unresolved critical items

Detection Triggers

Automatically log when you notice:

Build Failures (→ engineering issue):

  • CI pipeline fails with compilation errors
  • Docker build breaks on dependency resolution
  • Webpack/Vite/esbuild bundler errors
  • Type checking failures in CI

Test Failures (→ engineering issue or learning with testing_gap):

  • Test suite goes red after changes
  • Flaky test detected (passes locally, fails in CI)
  • Coverage drops below threshold
  • Integration test timeout

Code Review Feedback (→ learning with appropriate category):

  • Reviewer flags architecture violation
  • PR rejected for missing tests
  • Design pattern concerns raised
  • Performance concerns noted in review

Deployment Issues (→ engineering issue):

  • Deployment rollback triggered
  • Health check failures after deploy
  • Migration script errors
  • Configuration drift between environments

Performance Alerts (→ learning with performance_regression):

  • Response time increases past threshold
  • Memory usage spikes
  • Database query time degrades
  • Benchmark regression detected

Dependency Audit Warnings (→ engineering issue):

  • npm audit / pnpm audit finds vulnerabilities
  • Dependabot/Renovate flags CVE
  • Breaking change in minor/patch version
  • Deprecated package still in use

Priority Guidelines

PriorityWhen to Use
criticalProduction outage, data loss risk, security vulnerability (CVE with exploit), service completely down
highBuild broken on main, test suite red, blocking deployment, dependency CVE without known exploit
mediumTech debt accumulating, code smell in frequently-changed module, missing tests for happy path
lowStyle inconsistency, documentation gap, minor code smell in stable code, nice-to-have refactor

Area Tags

Use to filter learnings by engineering concern:

AreaScope
designArchitecture decisions, system design, API contracts, data modeling
implementationCode quality, algorithms, data structures, business logic
code_reviewReview feedback, PR patterns, merge conflicts, coding standards
ci_cdBuild pipelines, test automation, artifact management, CI configuration
deploymentRelease process, infrastructure, containers, orchestration, rollbacks
monitoringObservability, alerting, logging, tracing, SLO/SLA tracking

Best Practices

  1. Log immediately — context is freshest right after the build breaks or the review lands
  2. Include the error output — future agents need the exact error message to pattern-match
  3. Record the environment — Node version, OS, CI runner matter for reproducibility
  4. Link the PR or commit — makes root cause traceable
  5. Suggest concrete fixes — not just "investigate" but "add index on users.email"
  6. Categorize precisely — enables filtering by architecture_debt vs code_smell vs testing_gap
  7. Promote aggressively — if it broke the build twice, it belongs in coding standards
  8. Track recurrence — third time is a systemic issue, not a one-off

Gitignore Options

Keep learnings local (per-developer):

.learnings/

This is the default to avoid committing sensitive or noisy local logs by accident.

Track learnings in repo (team-wide): Don't add to .gitignore — learnings become shared engineering knowledge.

Hybrid (track templates, ignore entries):

.learnings/*.md
!.learnings/.gitkeep

Hook Integration

Enable reminders through agent hooks only when needed. This is opt-in — you must explicitly configure hooks.

Conservative Mode (Recommended)

  • Default to no hooks and log manually; if reminders are useful, enable UserPromptSubmit with scripts/activator.sh only.
  • Enable PostToolUse (scripts/error-detector.sh) only in trusted environments when you explicitly want command-output pattern checks.

Quick Setup (Claude Code / Codex)

Create .claude/settings.json in your project:

{
  "hooks": {
    "UserPromptSubmit": [{
      "matcher": "",
      "hooks": [{
        "type": "command",
        "command": "./skills/self-improving-engineering/scripts/activator.sh"
      }]
    }]
  }
}

This injects a lightweight engineering learning reminder after each prompt (~50-100 tokens overhead).

For advanced setup with PostToolUse error detection, see references/hooks-setup.md. Keep it disabled unless you explicitly want tool-output pattern checks.

ScriptHook TypePurpose
scripts/activator.shUserPromptSubmitReminds to evaluate engineering learnings after tasks
scripts/error-detector.shPostToolUse (Bash)Triggers on build errors, test failures, dep vulnerabilities

Automatic Skill Extraction

When a learning is valuable enough to become a reusable skill, extract it using the provided helper.

Skill Extraction Criteria

A learning qualifies for skill extraction when ANY of these apply:

CriterionDescription
RecurringHas See Also links to 2+ similar issues
VerifiedStatus is resolved with working fix
Non-obviousRequired actual debugging/investigation to discover
Broadly applicableNot project-specific; useful across codebases
User-flaggedUser says "save this as a skill" or similar

Extraction Workflow

  1. Identify candidate: Learning meets extraction criteria
  2. Run helper (or create manually):
   ./skills/self-improving-engineering/scripts/extract-skill.sh skill-name --dry-run
   ./skills/self-improving-engineering/scripts/extract-skill.sh skill-name
  1. Customize SKILL.md: Fill in template with learning content
  2. Update learning: Set status to promoted_to_skill, add Skill-Path
  3. Verify: Read skill in fresh session to ensure it's self-contained

Manual Extraction

  1. Create skills/<skill-name>/SKILL.md using template from assets/SKILL-TEMPLATE.md
  2. Follow Agent Skills spec: YAML frontmatter with name and description, name matches folder name
  3. Before extracting, verify: solution is tested, description is context-free, no hardcoded values, follows naming conventions

Multi-Agent Support

AgentActivationSetup
Claude CodeHooks (UserPromptSubmit, PostToolUse).claude/settings.json
Codex CLIHooks (same as Claude Code).codex/settings.json
GitHub CopilotManual (no hooks).github/copilot-instructions.md
OpenClawWorkspace injection + inter-agent messagingSee "OpenClaw Setup" above

Agent-Agnostic Guidance

Regardless of agent, apply self-improving engineering when you:

  1. Hit a build failure — especially if the fix wasn't obvious
  2. Discover an architecture violation — coupling, circular deps, layer breaches
  3. Find missing tests — gaps in coverage for critical paths
  4. Encounter a dependency problem — CVE, version conflict, breaking change
  5. Detect a performance regression — N+1 query, memory leak, slow endpoint
  6. Receive review feedback — design concerns, code smells, pattern violations

Stackability Contract (Standalone + Multi-Skill)

This skill is standalone-compatible and stackable with other self-improving skills.

Namespaced Logging (recommended for 2+ skills)

  • Namespace for this skill: .learnings/engineering/
  • Keep current standalone behavior if you prefer flat files.
  • Optional shared index for all skills: .learnings/INDEX.md

Required Metadata

Every new entry must include:

**Skill**: engineering

Hook Arbitration (when 2+ skills are enabled)

  • Use one dispatcher hook as the single entrypoint.
  • Dispatcher responsibilities: route by matcher, dedupe repeated events, and rate-limit reminders.
  • Suggested defaults: dedupe key = event + matcher + file + 5m_window; max 1 reminder per skill every 5 minutes.

Narrow Matcher Scope (engineering)

Only trigger this skill automatically for engineering signals such as:

  • build failed|ci failed|deploy failed|rollback|pipeline
  • dependency|version conflict|coverage drop|performance regression
  • explicit engineering intent in user prompt

Cross-Skill Precedence

When guidance conflicts, apply:

  1. security
  2. engineering
  3. coding
  4. ai
  5. user-explicit domain skill
  6. meta as tie-breaker

Ownership Rules

  • This skill writes only to .learnings/engineering/ in stackable mode.
  • It may read other skill folders for cross-linking, but should not rewrite their entries.

平台分布

OpenClaw

79.85%
按下载量换算779

安全审计

VirusTotal

通过

ClawScan

通过

Static analysis

通过

权限和风险

接触敏感数据

该 Skill 可能接触密钥、Token、环境变量或敏感配置,应进入高风险复核队列,默认不自动发布。

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