Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

tech-stack-research(技术堆栈研究)

tech-stack-research 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。

tech-stack-research 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,权限为只读;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描有提醒项,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 62,606。

总安装 329周安装 14GitHub Stars 6下载 115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:tech-stack-research(技术堆栈研究)
来源仓库:https://github.com/duc01226/easyplatform
仓库路径:skills/tech-stack-research
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/duc01226/easyplatform --skill tech-stack-research
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/duc01226/easyplatform --skill tech-stack-research

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。

用于技术方案的调研、检索和相关信息筛选。适合获取新技术趋势、框架对比和社区反馈。可基于关键词快速定位候选技术选项。tech-stack-research 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。使用前请确认是否支持实时数据获取。

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。建议验证信息来源的可信度和时效性。

来源仓库内路径:skills/tech-stack-research

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/duc01226/easyplatform --skill tech-stack-resea…;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

tech-stack-research 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/duc01226/easyplatform --skill tech-stack-research。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

tech-stack-research 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。

tech-stack-research 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。

tech-stack-research 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。

tech-stack-research 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 329 次,近一周安装 14 次,下载 115 次,GitHub 6 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。

tech-stack-research 安全吗?

第三方扫描有提醒项,说明存在需要人工确认的行为。安装前请打开源码看清它读了什么、联网到哪里。

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。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、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。

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
tech-stack-research

技术堆栈研究 · 本页

3296只读未明确有提醒

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

MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION use TaskCreate to break ALL work into small tasks BEFORE starting. MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION use AskUserQuestion at EVERY decision point — never assume user preferences. MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION research top 3 options per stack layer, compare with evidence, present report with recommendation + confidence %.

External Memory: For complex or lengthy work (research, analysis, scan, review), write intermediate findings and final results to a report file in plans/reports/ — prevents context loss and serves as deliverable.
Evidence Gate: MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION — every claim, finding, and recommendation requires file:line proof or traced evidence with confidence percentage (>80% to act, <80% must verify first).

Quick Summary

Goal: Research, analyze, and compare tech stack options for each layer of the system. Act as a solution architect — derive technical requirements from business analysis, research current market, produce detailed comparison report, and present options to user for decision.

Workflow:

  1. Load Business Context — Read business evaluation, domain model, refined PBI artifacts
  2. Derive Technical Requirements — Map business needs to technical constraints
  3. Research Per Layer — WebSearch top 3 options for each stack responsibility
  4. Deep Compare — Pros/cons matrix, benchmarks, community health, team fit
  5. Score & Rank — Weighted scoring across 8 criteria
  6. Generate Report — Structured comparison report with recommendation
  7. User Validation — Present findings, ask 5-8 questions, confirm choices

Key Rules:

  • MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION research minimum 3 options per stack layer
  • MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION include confidence % with evidence for every recommendation
  • MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION run user validation interview at end (never skip)
  • All claims must cite sources (URL, benchmark, case study)
  • Never recommend based on familiarity alone — evidence required

Be skeptical. Apply critical thinking, sequential thinking. Every claim needs traced proof, confidence percentages (Idea should be more than 80%).

Step 1: Load Business Context

Read artifacts from prior workflow steps (search in plans/ and team-artifacts/):

  • Business evaluation report (viability, scale, constraints)
  • Domain model / ERD (complexity, entity count, relationships)
  • Refined PBI (acceptance criteria, scope)
  • Discovery interview notes (team skills, budget, timeline)

Extract and summarize:

SignalValueSource
Expected users...discovery interview
Domain complexityLow/Med/Highdomain model
Team skills...discovery interview
Budget constraint...business evaluation
Timeline...business evaluation
Compliance needs...business evaluation
Real-time needsYes/Norefined PBI
Integration complexityLow/Med/Highdomain model

Step 2: Derive Technical Requirements

Map business signals to technical requirements:

Business SignalTechnical RequirementPriority
High user scaleHorizontal scaling, connection poolingMust
Complex domainStrong type system, ORM with migrationsMust
Real-time featuresWebSocket/SSE support, event-driven archMust
Small teamLow learning curve, good DX, batteries-includedShould
Tight budgetOpen-source, low hosting costShould
ComplianceAudit trail, encryption, auth frameworkMust

MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION validate derived requirements with user via AskUserQuestion before proceeding to research.

Step 3: Research Per Stack Layer

For EACH layer, research top 3 options using WebSearch (minimum 5 queries total):

Stack Layers to Evaluate

LayerExample OptionsResearch Focus
Backend Framework.NET, Node.js, Python, Go, JavaPerformance, type safety, ecosystem
Frontend FrameworkAngular, React, Vue, SvelteDX, ecosystem, hiring, enterprise fit
DatabasePostgreSQL, MongoDB, SQL ServerScale, query complexity, cost
Messaging/EventsRabbitMQ, Kafka, Redis StreamsThroughput, reliability, complexity
InfrastructureDocker+K8s, Serverless, PaaSCost, ops overhead, scaling
AuthKeycloak, Auth0, customCost, compliance, flexibility

WebSearch Queries (minimum 5 per layer)

"{option_A} vs {option_B} {current_year} comparison"
"{option} enterprise production case studies"
"{option} community size github stars"
"{option} performance benchmarks {use_case}"
"{option} security track record vulnerabilities"

Step 4: Deep Comparison Matrix

For EACH stack layer, produce a comparison table:

CriteriaOption AOption BOption CWeight
Team Fitscore + rationale......High
Scalabilityscore + rationale......High
Time-to-Marketscore + rationale......High
Ecosystem/Libsscore + rationale......Medium
Hiring Marketscore + rationale......Medium
Cost (hosting)score + rationale......Medium
Learning Curvescore + rationale......Medium
Community Healthscore + rationale......Low

Scoring: 1-5 scale. Weight: High=3x, Medium=2x, Low=1x.

Per-Option Detail Block

For each option, document:

### {Layer}: {Option Name}

**Pros:**

- {Pro 1} — {evidence/source}
- {Pro 2} — {evidence/source}
- {Pro 3} — {evidence/source}

**Cons:**

- {Con 1} — {evidence/source}
- {Con 2} — {evidence/source}

**Best suited when:** {conditions}
**Not suitable when:** {conditions}
**Production examples:** {2-3 real companies using this}

Step 5: Weighted Score & Ranking

Calculate weighted total per option per layer. Present ranking:

### {Layer} Ranking

1. **{Option A}** — Score: {X}/100 — Confidence: {Y}%
2. **{Option B}** — Score: {X}/100 — Confidence: {Y}%
3. **{Option C}** — Score: {X}/100 — Confidence: {Y}%

**Recommendation:** {Option A}
**Why:** {2-3 sentence rationale linking to team skills, scale, and constraints}

Step 6: Generate Report

Write report to {plan-dir}/research/tech-stack-comparison.md with:

  1. Executive summary (recommended full stack in 5 lines)
  2. Technical requirements table (from Step 2)
  3. Per-layer comparison matrices (from Step 4)
  4. Per-layer rankings with recommendations (from Step 5)
  5. Combined recommended stack diagram
  6. Risk assessment for recommended stack
  7. Alternative stack (second-best combo) for comparison
  8. Unresolved questions

Report must be <=200 lines. Use tables over prose.

Step 7: User Validation Interview

MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION present findings and ask 5-8 questions via AskUserQuestion:

Required Questions

  1. Per-layer recommendation confirmation — "For {layer}, I recommend {option}. Agree?"

- Options: Agree (Recommended) | Prefer {option B} | Need more research

  1. Risk tolerance — "The recommended stack has {risk}. Acceptable?"
  2. Team readiness — "Team needs to learn {X}. Training plan needed?"
  3. Budget alignment — "Estimated infra cost: ${X}/month. Within budget?"
  4. Timeline fit — "This stack enables MVP in {X} months. Acceptable?"

Optional Deep-Dive Questions (pick 2-3 based on context)

  • "Should we consider {emerging tech} for {layer}?"
  • "Any compliance requirements I haven't captured?"
  • "Preference for managed services vs self-hosted?"
  • "Monorepo or polyrepo for this team size?"

After user confirms, update report with final decisions and mark as status: confirmed.

Output

{plan-dir}/research/tech-stack-comparison.md    # Full comparison report
{plan-dir}/phase-02-tech-stack.md               # Final confirmed tech stack decisions

MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION break work into small todo tasks using TaskCreate BEFORE starting. MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION validate EVERY recommendation with user via AskUserQuestion — never auto-decide. MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION include confidence % and evidence citations for all claims. MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION add a final review todo task to verify work quality.


Next Steps

MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION — NO EXCEPTIONS after completing this skill, you MUST ATTENTION use AskUserQuestion to present these options. Do NOT skip because the task seems "simple" or "obvious" — the user decides:

  • "/architecture-design (Recommended)" — Design solution architecture with chosen tech stack
  • "/plan" — If architecture already decided
  • "Skip, continue manually" — user decides

Closing Reminders

MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION break work into small todo tasks using TaskCreate BEFORE starting. MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION validate decisions with user via AskUserQuestion — never auto-decide. MANDATORY IMPORTANT MUST ATTENTION add a final review todo task to verify work quality.

平台分布

Codex

38.89%
按下载量换算45

Claude

29.49%
按下载量换算34

Cursor

18.69%
按下载量换算21

Gemini CLI

9.74%
按下载量换算11

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

可疑

Snyk

可疑

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