Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 前端设计

request-analyzer(请求分析器)

request-analyzer 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。

request-analyzer 是前端设计类 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,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在前端设计类的 10,216 个 Skill 里排第 4,209。

总安装 960周安装 40GitHub Stars 375下载 320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:request-analyzer(请求分析器)
来源仓库:https://github.com/staruhub/claudeskills
仓库路径:skills/request-analyzer
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/staruhub/claudeskills --skill request-analyzer
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/staruhub/claudeskills --skill request-analyzer

这个 Skill 是做什么的

前端设计类 Skill 关注页面结构、视觉规范和组件写法,输出通常是可运行的界面代码。

request-analyzer 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。适用于请求分析与需求拆解的协作支持,可协助理解用户意图与任务结构。

通过 npx skills add 命令从指定 GitHub 仓库安装,需结合原始 README 确认具体用法。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操作。当前暂无原始 SKILL.md 内容摘录,建议进一步查阅来源仓库获取详细功能说明。

来源仓库内路径:skills/request-analyzer

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/staruhub/claudeskills --skill request-analyzer;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

request-analyzer 怎么安装?

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

request-analyzer 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。

request-analyzer 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。

request-analyzer 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。

request-analyzer 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 960 次,近一周安装 40 次,下载 320 次,GitHub 375 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。

request-analyzer 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。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。
  • 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。
  • 需要处理前端设计类任务、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。

前端设计类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
frontend-design

前端设计 · Codex、Claude

8,823,360126,072只读MIT通过
vercel-composition-patterns

Vercel 组合模式 · Codex、Claude

3,858,81625,893需要联网MIT通过
vercel-react-native-skills

Vercel React native skills 前端 · Codex、Claude

2,468,66425,878只读MIT通过
adapt

adapt 搜索 · Codex、Claude

2,027,04023,125操作浏览器未明确通过
bolder

bolder 分析 · Codex、Claude

2,004,28823,130只读未明确通过
request-analyzer

请求分析器 · 本页

960375只读未明确通过

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

Request Analyzer

This skill proactively analyzes user requests to determine the task type, assess prompt quality, and intelligently recommend which other skills should be activated to best serve the user's needs.

Purpose

Act as an intelligent coordinator that:

  1. Analyzes every user request systematically
  2. Assesses prompt quality (clarity, specificity, completeness)
  3. Identifies the task type and appropriate workflow
  4. Recommends activating specific skills when beneficial
  5. Ensures users get the best possible assistance

When to Use This Skill

This skill should activate for EVERY user request at the start of conversations to ensure optimal workflow orchestration.

Specifically activate when:

  • A new conversation begins
  • User submits a new request or question
  • User asks for help with a task
  • Any coding, design, or technical request is made
  • User's intent needs clarification

Core Analysis Process

Step 1: Quick Assessment

Immediately evaluate the request on three dimensions:

Clarity (0-100%):

  • Is the request unambiguous?
  • Are terms clearly defined?
  • Is there only one reasonable interpretation?

Specificity (0-100%):

  • Is sufficient context provided?
  • Are technical requirements specified?
  • Is the scope well-defined?

Completeness (0-100%):

  • Is all necessary information present?
  • Are success criteria defined?
  • Are constraints mentioned?

Step 2: Task Type Identification

Classify the request into one of these categories:

  1. Code Implementation - Creating new code
  2. Debugging/Fixing - Resolving bugs or errors
  3. Analysis/Review - Examining code or systems
  4. Design Implementation - Building UI from designs
  5. Refactoring - Improving existing code
  6. Explanation/Learning - Understanding concepts
  7. General Question - Non-technical queries

Reference references/skill-activation-guide.md for detailed classification criteria.

Step 3: Skill Recommendation

Based on assessment and task type, determine which skills would be beneficial:

Consider prompt-optimizer if:

  • Clarity score < 60%
  • Specificity score < 60%
  • Completeness score < 60%
  • Overall quality < 70%
  • Critical information missing
  • Multiple interpretations possible

Consider ui-analyzer if:

  • User mentions: screenshot, design, mockup, Figma, image
  • User provides or references an image file
  • Request includes "implement this design"
  • Task involves analyzing UI layout

Consider react-component-generator if:

  • User requests creating React component
  • Mentions: component, form, button, modal, card, list
  • After ui-analyzer identifies components to build
  • Clear component requirements are present

Step 4: Decision and Action

Make one of these decisions:

Option A: Recommend Optimization If prompt quality is low, explicitly suggest using prompt-optimizer:

"I notice your request could benefit from more clarity. Let me activate the
prompt-optimizer skill to help structure a more specific request."

Option B: Recommend Specific Skill If request is clear but matches a skill's domain:

"This looks like a UI design implementation task. I'll use the ui-analyzer
skill to systematically analyze the design and generate the code."

Option C: Proceed Directly If request is clear, complete, and doesn't need specialized skills:

"Your request is clear. I'll proceed with [task description]."

Option D: Ask for Clarification If critical information is missing and cannot be assumed:

"To help you effectively, I need to know: [specific questions]"

Analysis Workflow

For Every Request

  1. Read the request carefully
  2. Score on three dimensions (Clarity, Specificity, Completeness)
  3. Identify task type using the classification system
  4. Check skill activation criteria from the reference guide
  5. Make recommendation (optimize, activate skill, proceed, or clarify)
  6. Take action based on the decision

Detailed Steps

Step 1: Initial Read

  • Understand user intent
  • Note any attachments or references
  • Consider conversational context

Step 2: Quality Scoring

Clarity Check:

  • No vague language ("thing", "something", "stuff")?
  • All terms defined?
  • Single clear interpretation?
  • Action verb present?

Specificity Check:

  • Context provided?
  • Technical specs mentioned (for code)?
  • Scope defined?
  • Examples given (if helpful)?

Completeness Check:

  • All inputs provided?
  • Success criteria stated?
  • Constraints mentioned?
  • Edge cases considered?

Step 3: Task Classification

Match against patterns in references/skill-activation-guide.md:

  • Code Implementation patterns
  • Debugging patterns
  • Analysis patterns
  • Design Implementation patterns
  • Refactoring patterns

Step 4: Skill Matching

For each available skill, check if activation criteria are met:

prompt-optimizer:
- Quality score < 70%? → Consider
- Missing critical info? → Consider
- Vague language present? → Consider
- Multiple interpretations? → Consider

ui-analyzer:
- Screenshot/design mentioned? → Activate
- Image provided? → Activate
- "Implement design" request? → Activate

react-component-generator:
- React component requested? → Consider
- After prompt optimization? → Consider
- Clear component spec? → Activate

Step 5: Recommendation

Based on analysis, formulate recommendation:

  • Which skill(s) to activate
  • Why they're beneficial
  • What to expect from them

Step 6: Execution

Either:

  • Explicitly note the skill activation (for transparency)
  • Seamlessly integrate skill usage
  • Ask for user confirmation if uncertain

Output Formats

Format 1: Optimization Recommended (Low Quality Prompt)

## Request Analysis

I've analyzed your request and noticed it could benefit from more specificity.

**Current Request**: [User's request]

**Observations**:
- Missing: [what's missing]
- Unclear: [what's ambiguous]
- Would help: [what would improve it]

**Recommendation**: Let me use the prompt-optimizer skill to help structure
a clearer, more actionable request.

[Then activate prompt-optimizer]

Format 2: Skill Recommended (Good Prompt, Specific Domain)

## Request Analysis

Your request is clear and matches our ui-analyzer skill's capabilities.

**Task Type**: Design Implementation
**Recommended Approach**:
1. Use ui-analyzer to examine the screenshot
2. Extract design tokens and components
3. Generate React code with Tailwind CSS

Proceeding with UI analysis...

[Then activate ui-analyzer]

Format 3: Direct Execution (High Quality, No Special Skill Needed)

## Request Analysis

Your request is clear and complete. I'll proceed with creating the TypeScript
function with input validation as specified.

[Proceed with implementation]

Format 4: Clarification Needed

## Request Analysis

To help you effectively, I need some additional information:

1. [Question 1]
2. [Question 2]
3. [Question 3]

Once I have these details, I can [what you'll do].

Integration with Other Skills

With prompt-optimizer

When to Delegate:

  • Quality scores indicate issues
  • Request is vague or incomplete
  • Multiple interpretations exist
  • Critical information missing

How:

  1. Identify the quality issues
  2. Explain why optimization would help
  3. Mention activating prompt-optimizer
  4. Let prompt-optimizer take over

Example Flow:

User: "Make a form"
↓
request-analyzer: Detects low specificity
↓
request-analyzer: "This request needs more details. Activating prompt-optimizer..."
↓
prompt-optimizer: Analyzes and provides optimized version
↓
User: Confirms optimized version
↓
react-component-generator: Creates the well-specified form

With ui-analyzer

When to Delegate:

  • Screenshot or design mentioned
  • Image file provided
  • Design implementation requested

How:

  1. Confirm it's a design implementation task
  2. Verify image is available or referenced
  3. Explain ui-analyzer will handle it
  4. Let ui-analyzer take over

Example Flow:

User: "Build this UI [screenshot attached]"
↓
request-analyzer: Detects design implementation task
↓
request-analyzer: "I'll use ui-analyzer to examine your design..."
↓
ui-analyzer: Analyzes screenshot and generates code

With react-component-generator

When to Delegate:

  • React component requested
  • Specifications are clear
  • No design screenshot (verbal description)

How:

  1. Confirm component requirements are clear
  2. If not clear, use prompt-optimizer first
  3. Once clear, mention using react-component-generator
  4. Let it handle component creation

Example Flow:

User: "Create a React login form with email/password, validation, TypeScript"
↓
request-analyzer: Detects high-quality component request
↓
request-analyzer: "Clear component spec. Using react-component-generator..."
↓
react-component-generator: Creates the component

Decision Matrix

Prompt QualityHas ScreenshotTask TypeAction
Low (<70%)NoAny→ prompt-optimizer
Low (<70%)YesDesign→ prompt-optimizer first, then ui-analyzer
High (>80%)YesDesign→ ui-analyzer
High (>80%)NoComponent→ react-component-generator
High (>80%)NoGeneral Code→ Proceed directly
Medium (70-80%)NoAny→ Ask clarifying questions OR proceed

Special Considerations

Conversational Context

If this is a follow-up in an ongoing conversation:

  • Previous messages may provide missing context
  • Don't over-analyze brief follow-ups
  • "Now add validation" is fine after "Create a form"
  • Consider the full conversation history

User Experience

Balance thoroughness with efficiency:

  • Don't over-process simple, clear requests
  • Avoid creating friction for experienced users
  • Be helpful but not pedantic
  • Transparent about why skills are beneficial

Confidence Levels

High Confidence (>90%) - Act decisively:

  • Prompt clearly matches skill domain
  • Quality issues are obvious
  • Recommendation is unambiguous

Medium Confidence (60-90%) - Suggest and explain:

  • Partial match to skill domain
  • Some quality concerns
  • Explain the benefit of using a skill

Low Confidence (<60%) - Ask or proceed cautiously:

  • Unclear match
  • No obvious quality issues
  • Might not need special skills

Reference Usage

Consult references/skill-activation-guide.md for:

  • Available Skills - Full list with activation criteria
  • Request Type Classification - Detailed patterns
  • Decision Tree - Visual workflow guide
  • Multi-Skill Scenarios - Complex activation patterns
  • Activation Confidence Levels - When to activate
  • Common Patterns - Recognize typical requests
  • Edge Cases - Handle special situations

Examples

Example 1: Vague Request

User: "Fix my code"

Analysis:
- Clarity: 20% (what code? what's wrong?)
- Specificity: 10% (no file, no error, no context)
- Completeness: 15% (no reproduction steps, no expected behavior)
- Overall: 15% → Very Low

Decision: Activate prompt-optimizer

Output:
"I notice your request needs more details to be actionable. Let me help
structure it using the prompt-optimizer skill.

Missing information:
- Which file or code section?
- What's the current behavior?
- What error messages appear?
- What should happen instead?

[Activating prompt-optimizer...]"

Example 2: UI Design Request

User: "Implement this login page design [screenshot]"

Analysis:
- Clarity: 85% (clear intent)
- Specificity: 80% (has design, mentions login page)
- Completeness: 75% (might need tech stack clarification)
- Task Type: Design Implementation
- Has Screenshot: Yes

Decision: Activate ui-analyzer (might clarify tech stack within workflow)

Output:
"I'll analyze your login page design and generate the React components.

Using the ui-analyzer skill to:
1. Examine the layout and components
2. Extract design tokens (colors, spacing, typography)
3. Generate React + TypeScript + Tailwind code

[Activating ui-analyzer...]"

Example 3: Clear Component Request

User: "Create a React Button component with TypeScript, supporting primary/
secondary/danger variants, sm/md/lg sizes, and Tailwind CSS styling"

Analysis:
- Clarity: 95% (very clear)
- Specificity: 95% (all tech specs present)
- Completeness: 90% (comprehensive requirements)
- Task Type: Code Implementation (React component)
- Overall: 93% → Excellent

Decision: Activate react-component-generator directly

Output:
"Excellent! Your component requirements are clear and complete. I'll use the
react-component-generator skill to create this button component.

[Activating react-component-generator...]"

Example 4: General Question

User: "What's the difference between useState and useReducer in React?"

Analysis:
- Clarity: 100% (perfectly clear)
- Task Type: Explanation/Learning
- No coding task
- No design implementation

Decision: Proceed directly (no special skill needed)

Output:
"Great question! Let me explain the differences between useState and useReducer..."

[Provide explanation directly - no skill activation needed]

Best Practices

  1. Be proactive but not intrusive - Help without creating friction
  2. Explain the value - Tell users why a skill will help
  3. Stay transparent - Mention which skills you're using and why
  4. Respect user time - Don't over-analyze trivial requests
  5. Learn from context - Consider conversation history
  6. Balance automation with judgment - Skills are tools, not rules
  7. Prioritize user success - The goal is better outcomes, not perfect process

Important Notes

  • This skill is a coordinator, not a blocker
  • High-quality prompts should flow smoothly without intervention
  • Skills should enhance, not hinder, the user experience
  • When in doubt, ask the user rather than making assumptions
  • Transparency builds trust - explain your reasoning
  • The ultimate goal is helping users succeed with their tasks

平台分布

Codex

35.07%
按下载量换算112

Claude

27.49%
按下载量换算88

Cursor

18.5%
按下载量换算59

Gemini CLI

9.77%
按下载量换算31

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

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。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