Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

thinking-systems(思维系统)

thinking-systems 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。

thinking-systems 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,权限为执行命令;许可证信息还不明确,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 53,999。

总安装 517周安装 22GitHub Stars 46下载 181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:thinking-systems(思维系统)
来源仓库:https://github.com/tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills
仓库路径:skills/thinking-systems
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills --skill thinking-systems
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/tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills --skill thinking-systems

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。

思维系统用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息。适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor 等宿主中基于关键词或场景定位结果。通过 npx 安装并指定技能名称,可结合仓库路径继续核验用法。使用前需确认权限范围、维护状态及是否触发联网或文件操作。

thinking-systems 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

来源仓库内路径:skills/thinking-systems

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/tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills --skill thinkin…;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

    它需要执行命令,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

thinking-systems 怎么安装?

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

thinking-systems 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。

thinking-systems 需要什么权限?

权限级别是执行命令。安装流程涉及命令执行,可能通过 npx skills add https://github.com/tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills --skill thinking-systems 联网下载 Skill 或依赖。用户安装前应确认命令来源、仓库内容和执行环境。

thinking-systems 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。

thinking-systems 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 517 次,近一周安装 22 次,下载 181 次,GitHub 46 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。

thinking-systems 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。

先想清楚的地方

  • 需要执行命令,装到常用环境前要先评估影响面。
  • 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。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。

不太适合

  • 不能接受 Skill 在你机器上执行命令的人。
  • 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
thinking-systems

思维系统 · 本页

51746执行命令未明确通过

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

Systems Thinking

Overview

Systems thinking views problems as part of interconnected wholes rather than isolated components. It focuses on relationships, feedback loops, and emergent properties—behaviors that arise from interactions and can't be predicted from parts alone. Essential for debugging complex distributed systems and understanding why "obvious" fixes often fail.

Core Principle: The behavior of a system cannot be understood by analyzing components in isolation. Look at connections, feedback, and emergence.

When to Use

  • Debugging issues that span multiple services/components
  • Understanding unexpected emergent behavior
  • Designing resilient architectures
  • Analyzing incidents and outages
  • When fixing one thing breaks another
  • Performance issues with non-obvious causes
  • Organizational/process problems

Decision flow:

Problem spans multiple components?     → yes → APPLY SYSTEMS THINKING
Fix in one place caused issue in another? → yes → APPLY SYSTEMS THINKING
Behavior seems "emergent" or unexpected?  → yes → APPLY SYSTEMS THINKING

Key Concepts

1. Feedback Loops

Reinforcing (Positive) Loops: Amplify change

Technical Debt Loop:
Deadline pressure → Shortcuts → More bugs → More firefighting
                                           ↓
                            ← Less time for quality ←

Balancing (Negative) Loops: Counteract change

Auto-scaling Loop:
Load increases → More instances spawn → Load per instance decreases
                                       ↓
                    ← Fewer instances needed ←

Questions to identify loops:

  • Does this effect feed back into its cause?
  • Is this self-reinforcing or self-correcting?
  • What keeps this system in equilibrium?

2. Stocks and Flows

Stocks: Accumulated quantities (users, technical debt, cache size) Flows: Rates of change (registrations/day, bugs fixed/sprint)

┌─────────────────────────────────────┐
│  Inflow → [Stock] → Outflow         │
│                                     │
│  New bugs → [Bug Backlog] → Fixes   │
│  Requests → [Queue Depth] → Processed│
│  Hires → [Team Size] → Attrition    │
└─────────────────────────────────────┘

Key insight: Stocks change slowly even when flows change quickly. Queue depth doesn't drop instantly when you add capacity.

3. Delays

Time lags between cause and effect obscure relationships:

Code deployed → [Delay: Cache TTL] → Users see change
Feature shipped → [Delay: Adoption curve] → Metrics change
New hire starts → [Delay: Ramp-up] → Productivity impact

Danger: Acting before feedback arrives leads to overcorrection.

4. Non-Linear Relationships

Small changes can have large effects (and vice versa):

Linear assumption: 2x traffic = 2x latency
Reality: Traffic crosses threshold → 10x latency (queue buildup)

Linear assumption: Adding engineer adds capacity
Reality: Communication overhead grows O(n²)

5. Emergent Properties

Behaviors that arise from interactions, not individual components:

  • Distributed system: No single service is slow, but the system is slow (cascading delays)
  • Team dynamics: No individual is toxic, but collaboration is toxic (incentive interactions)
  • Market behavior: No actor intends a bubble, but bubble emerges

Systems Debugging Process

Step 1: Map the System

Draw components, connections, and data/control flows:

┌─────────┐     ┌─────────┐     ┌─────────┐
│ Client  │────▶│   API   │────▶│   DB    │
└─────────┘     └────┬────┘     └─────────┘
                     │
                     ▼
               ┌─────────┐
               │  Cache  │
               └─────────┘

Step 2: Identify Feedback Loops

For each loop, determine:

  • Is it reinforcing or balancing?
  • What's the delay in the loop?
  • What could make it unstable?
Retry Storm Loop (Reinforcing - Dangerous):
Service slow → Clients retry → More load → Service slower → More retries

Step 3: Trace Upstream

Follow the symptom backward to find originating cause:

Symptom: High latency in Service C
→ Service C waiting on Service B
  → Service B waiting on Service A
    → Service A doing full table scan (ROOT CAUSE)

Step 4: Look for Interactions

What happens when components interact under stress?

  • Circuit breakers tripping
  • Cascading timeouts
  • Resource contention
  • Thundering herd

Step 5: Consider Time Dynamics

  • When did this start?
  • What changed recently (deploys, config, traffic)?
  • Is it periodic? (Cron jobs, cache expiration, batch processes)
  • Is it growing or stabilizing?

Common System Patterns

Cascading Failure

One component fails → Dependent components overload → They fail
                                                    ↓
                              ← More traffic to remaining ←

Mitigation: Circuit breakers, bulkheads, graceful degradation

Thundering Herd

Cache expires → All requests hit backend simultaneously → Overload

Mitigation: Jittered expiration, cache warming, request coalescing

Queue Backup

Processing rate < Arrival rate → Queue grows → Memory pressure → OOM

Mitigation: Backpressure, rate limiting, queue bounds

Resource Contention

Multiple processes → Same resource → Lock contention → Serialization
                                                     ↓
                    Throughput collapses despite available CPU

Mitigation: Sharding, optimistic locking, resource isolation

Causal Loop Diagram Template

┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│                    System: [Name]                            │
├──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│                                                              │
│    ┌─────────┐                        ┌─────────┐           │
│    │ Factor  │──────(+)──────────────▶│ Factor  │           │
│    │    A    │                        │    B    │           │
│    └─────────┘                        └────┬────┘           │
│         ▲                                  │                │
│         │                                  │                │
│        (-)                                (+)               │
│         │                                  │                │
│         │         ┌─────────┐              │                │
│         └─────────│ Factor  │◀─────────────┘                │
│                   │    C    │                               │
│                   └─────────┘                               │
│                                                              │
│   Legend: (+) = same direction, (-) = opposite direction    │
│   Loop type: Reinforcing / Balancing                        │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Leverage Points

Where small changes have large effects (Donella Meadows):

LeverageExampleImpact
ParametersTimeout valuesLow
Buffer sizesQueue limitsLow-Medium
Feedback loopsAdd monitoringMedium
Information flowsMake metrics visibleMedium-High
RulesChange retry policyHigh
GoalsRedefine SLOsVery High
ParadigmRethink architectureTransformational

Verification Checklist

  • Mapped system components and connections
  • Identified at least one feedback loop
  • Traced symptom upstream to potential root causes
  • Considered time delays in the system
  • Looked for emergent/interaction effects
  • Identified leverage points for intervention
  • Considered unintended consequences of fix

Key Questions

  • "What feeds back into what?"
  • "Where are the delays in this system?"
  • "What happens when this scales 10x?"
  • "What would an observer see vs. what's actually happening?"
  • "If I fix this here, what breaks over there?"
  • "What behavior emerges that no single component intends?"
  • "Where is the smallest change with the largest effect?"

Meadows' Reminder

"We can't control systems or figure them out. But we can dance with them."

Systems resist simple fixes. Effective intervention requires understanding the whole, finding leverage points, and accepting that you're influencing, not controlling.

平台分布

Codex

36.29%
按下载量换算66

Claude

28.36%
按下载量换算51

Cursor

19.4%
按下载量换算35

Gemini CLI

10.88%
按下载量换算20

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

执行命令

安装流程涉及命令执行,可能通过 npx skills add https://github.com/tjboudreaux/cc-thinking-skills --skill thinking-systems 联网下载 Skill 或依赖。用户安装前应确认命令来源、仓库内容和执行环境。

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