Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

validate-docs-implementation(验证文档实施)

用于辅助文档、README、Markdown、说明文和内容稿件的整理与改写。它适合让 Agent 提炼结构、补齐章节、统一术语、检查链接或把零散材料整理成可读文档。使用时应保留项目已有事实、命令和路径,不要把未确认的信息写成确定结论;涉及对外文案时,还需要控制语气,避免过度营销或夸大能力。

validate-docs-implementation 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;许可证为 MIT,第三方扫描有未通过项,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 58,786。

总安装 404周安装 17GitHub Stars 2下载 141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

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:validate-docs-implementation(验证文档实施)
来源仓库:https://github.com/abdullahbeam/nexus-design-abdullah
仓库路径:skills/validate-docs-implementation
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/abdullahbeam/nexus-design-abdullah --skill validate-docs-implementation
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。不同来源提供的安装方式可能略有差异;本站展示可直接复制的安装命令,安装前请核对来源页面。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/abdullahbeam/nexus-design-abdullah --skill validate-docs-implementation

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。

validate-docs-implementation 检查文档内容与实际代码实现是否一致。适用于开源项目维护、技术文档同步或内部知识库管理。可提取代码注释、README 描述并比对关键信息点。自动化检查无法覆盖所有细节,复杂逻辑仍需人工确认。

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/validate-docs-implementation

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/abdullahbeam/nexus-design-abdullah --skill val…;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

validate-docs-implementation 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/abdullahbeam/nexus-design-abdullah --skill validate-docs…。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

validate-docs-implementation 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。

validate-docs-implementation 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。

validate-docs-implementation 是免费的吗?

来源标注的许可证是 MIT。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。

validate-docs-implementation 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 404 次,近一周安装 17 次,下载 141 次,GitHub 2 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。

validate-docs-implementation 安全吗?

第三方扫描有未通过项,风险较高。除非你确认过源码,否则不建议直接安装到常用环境。

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。
  • 3 个目录同时收录,说明这个 Skill 流传比较广。
  • 许可证明确为 MIT,商用和分发边界好判断。
  • 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

  • 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
validate-docs-implementation

验证文档实施 · 本页

4042只读MIT未通过

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

Validate Documentation vs Implementation

Purpose: Systematically identify and fix mismatches between actual implementation code and documentation.

Load When:

  • User says: "validate docs", "check documentation", "docs vs implementation"
  • User mentions: "documentation mismatch", "docs don't match code"
  • After major code changes that may affect docs
  • During pre-release validation

Core Value: Ensures documentation accurately reflects actual implementation, preventing user confusion and wasted debugging time.


Quick Reference

What This Skill Does:

  1. ✅ Analyzes implementation code (scripts, core logic)
  2. ✅ Identifies what the code actually creates/does
  3. ✅ Searches all documentation for references to those entities
  4. ✅ Compares documented behavior vs actual behavior
  5. ✅ Fixes all mismatches systematically
  6. ✅ Provides summary of changes made

Typical Mismatches Found:

  • File names (e.g., docs say "design.md" but code creates "plan.md")
  • Folder structure (e.g., docs missing "02-resources/" directory)
  • Counts (e.g., docs say "3 files" but script creates "4 directories + 3 files")
  • Naming conventions (e.g., old vs new terminology)
  • References to deprecated features

Workflow: 5-Step Validation Process

Step 1: Analyze Implementation

Goal: Understand what the code actually does

Actions:

  1. Read the implementation file(s) identified by user
  2. Document exactly what it creates/generates/does:

- Files created (names, locations, count) - Folders created (names, structure, count) - Data structures used - Behavior patterns

  1. Create a reference list of "ground truth" facts

Example Output:

## Implementation Analysis: init_project.py

**Creates**:
- 4 directories: 01-planning/, 02-resources/, 03-working/, 04-outputs/
- 3 files in 01-planning/: overview.md, plan.md, steps.md

**Does NOT create**:
- design.md (old name)
- tasks.md (old name)
- requirements.md (never existed)

Step 2: Search Documentation

Goal: Find all references to the entities/behavior

Actions:

  1. Use Grep to search for old/mismatched terms across documentation: # Search for old file names grep -r "design\.md\|tasks\.md\|requirements\.md" 00-system/ # Search for old folder structure grep -r "02-working\|03-outputs" 00-system/
  2. Identify all files that contain references
  3. For each file, note line numbers and context

Output: List of files needing updates with specific locations


Step 3: Compare & Identify Mismatches

Goal: Categorize what needs fixing

Actions:

  1. For each documentation file found:

- Read the relevant sections - Compare against implementation truth - Categorize mismatch type: - File name mismatch: Wrong file names referenced - Structure mismatch: Wrong folder structure shown - Count mismatch: Wrong counts ("3 files" vs "4 directories + 3 files") - Missing info: Implementation creates X but docs don't mention it

  1. Prioritize fixes:

- Critical: User-facing docs, core system maps - Important: Skill workflows, reference materials - Nice-to-have: Examples, comments


Step 4: Fix All Mismatches

Goal: Update documentation to match implementation

Actions:

  1. For each file with mismatches:

- Read the file - Use Edit tool to fix each mismatch - Preserve context and formatting - Update related references (e.g., if fixing folder name, update all mentions)

  1. Common fix patterns: # File name fixes OLD: "design.md" → NEW: "plan.md" OLD: "tasks.md" → NEW: "steps.md" # Structure fixes OLD: "02-working/" → NEW: "03-working/" OLD: "03-outputs/" → NEW: "04-outputs/" ADD: "02-resources/" (was missing) # Count fixes OLD: "3 core files" NEW: "4 directories (01-planning/, 02-resources/, 03-working/, 04-outputs/) + 3 planning files"
  2. Track progress with TodoWrite:

- Mark each file as completed after fixing - Maintains visibility for user


Step 5: Verify & Generate Report

Goal: Confirm all fixes are consistent and create permanent validation record

Actions:

5A. Verification:

  1. Re-search for old terms to verify they're gone: grep -r "design\.md" 00-system/ # Should return no results
  2. Spot-check fixed files to ensure consistency

5B. Determine Report Location:

First time or if location not set:

AI: "Where should I save validation reports? Options:
    1. 04-workspace/validation-reports/ (recommended - organized, searchable)
    2. 01-memory/validation-reports/ (persistent record)
    3. Custom location (you specify)

    Or say 'skip' to not save reports."

User: [Chooses option]

AI: "Got it! I'll save reports to [location]. This will be remembered for future validations."

If location already configured (from previous validation):

AI: "Saving report to configured location: [location]"

5C. Generate & Save Report:

  1. Create validation report using template (see references/report-template.md)
  2. Generate filename: validation-{implementation}-YYYY-MM-DD.md

- Example: validation-init-project-2025-11-24.md

  1. Save to configured location
  2. Display summary to user with link to full report

Report includes:

  • Implementation analyzed
  • Files updated (with line-by-line changes)
  • Mismatch breakdown by type
  • Verification results
  • Status and next steps

Example output:

✅ Validation complete!

**Summary**:
- 6 files updated
- 23 total fixes
- 0 grep results for old terms

📄 Full report saved: [04-workspace/validation-reports/validation-init-project-2025-11-24.md](04-workspace/validation-reports/validation-init-project-2025-11-24.md)

Common Validation Scenarios

Scenario 1: Script Creates Different Files Than Documented

Symptoms:

  • User reports "docs mention design.md but I don't see it"
  • Script creates files not mentioned in docs

Process:

  1. Read script to see what it actually creates
  2. Search docs for old file names
  3. Replace all references systematically

Example: The create-project validation we just did


Scenario 2: Folder Structure Changed

Symptoms:

  • Documentation shows old folder structure
  • New folders not mentioned in docs

Process:

  1. Check actual project structure (ls)
  2. Compare against documented structure
  3. Update all structure diagrams and references

Scenario 3: Counts/Descriptions Wrong

Symptoms:

  • "Creates 3 files" but actually creates more
  • Missing important details about what's created

Process:

  1. Count actual artifacts created
  2. Find all count references in docs
  3. Update with complete, accurate descriptions

Best Practices

Be Systematic

  • Don't skip steps or assume you've found everything
  • Use grep to search exhaustively
  • Check related files (if you fix system-map.md, check framework-overview.md too)

Preserve Context

  • Don't just fix the immediate error
  • Update related references nearby
  • Ensure examples/diagrams stay consistent

Use Parallel Searches

  • When searching for multiple patterns, use multiple Grep calls in parallel
  • Saves time and provides complete picture faster

Track Progress

  • Use TodoWrite to show user what's being fixed
  • Mark items complete as you go
  • Provides transparency and confidence

Verify Fixes

  • Re-search for old terms after fixing
  • Spot-check that new terminology is consistent
  • Run validation commands if available

Integration Points

  • After code changes: Run this validation before committing
  • Pre-release: Validate all docs match current implementation
  • User reports mismatch: Use this skill to fix comprehensively
  • Documentation updates: Verify changes didn't introduce new mismatches

Success Criteria

✅ Zero grep results for old/deprecated terms ✅ All structure diagrams match actual folder structure ✅ All counts match actual artifact counts ✅ All file references use current names ✅ User can follow docs without confusion


Remember: Documentation debt compounds quickly. Fix mismatches systematically and completely the first time!

平台分布

Claude Code

30.93%
按下载量换算44

Antigravity

24.95%
按下载量换算35

windsurf

15.84%
按下载量换算22

Codex

11.85%
按下载量换算17

OpenCode

7.83%
按下载量换算11

Gemini CLI

3.74%
按下载量换算5

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

未通过

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。来源安全扫描存在提醒或未通过项,安装前请自行复核。

继续浏览同类 Skills