Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索需要联网github未标认证来源可访问许可证需确认审计提醒

validatevalidate 文档

Agent Skill

validate 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。

总安装

297

周安装

12

GitHub Stars

168

下载量

93
CodexClaudeCursorGemini CLI

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

unknown

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

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(validate 文档)
来源仓库:https://github.com/whawkinsiv/claude-code-skills
仓库路径:skills/validate
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/whawkinsiv/claude-code-skills --skill validate
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/whawkinsiv/claude-code-skills --skill validate

简介

validate 用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息。

  • 适用于文档验证或合规性检查的信息支持场景。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。
  • 可在多种 AI 宿主中调用,安装方式为 GitHub。
  • 使用前应评估其对系统权限和网络访问的需求。
  • validate 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

SKILL.md

Idea Validation

The #1 reason startups fail is "no market need." Validation isn't about asking people if they'd use something — it's about observing whether they'll pay, sign up, or take action. This skill helps you test demand before writing a single line of code.

Core Principles

  • Ideas are free. Validated demand is valuable. Never skip validation because you're excited.
  • "Would you use this?" is a useless question. "Will you pay $X right now?" is the only one that matters.
  • The goal of validation is to fail fast and cheap — not to confirm what you already believe.
  • You don't need to build anything to validate. Landing pages, waitlists, and conversations come first.
  • Validation is not a one-time event. You re-validate at every stage: idea, MVP, pricing, features.

Pressure-Test Your Idea

Before running experiments, pressure-test the idea itself. These six questions expose fatal flaws fast — answer them honestly, not optimistically.

Which Questions to Answer

Your StageFocus On
Pre-product (just an idea)Q1, Q2, Q3
Have a prototype or early usersQ2, Q4, Q5
Have paying customersQ4, Q5, Q6

The Six Questions

Q1 — Demand Reality: What evidence do you have — beyond your own experience — that someone else actually wants this? Not "I think people need it." What have you seen, heard, or measured?

Q2 — Status Quo: What are people in your field doing right now to handle this — even badly? What does that workaround cost them in time, money, or errors?

Q3 — Desperate Specificity: Name one specific person who needs this most. Not "dentists" — which dentist, at which practice, with what problem? If you can't name someone, you haven't found your customer yet.

Q4 — Narrowest Wedge: What's the smallest version of this someone would pay for this week — not after you build the platform? One screen, one workflow, one outcome.

Q5 — Observation: Have you watched a colleague struggle with this task without helping them? What surprised you about how they actually do it vs. how you assumed?

Q6 — Future-Fit: How does your industry change in 3 years, and does that make this tool more essential or less?

Interest is not demand. Waitlist signups are not demand. Someone would be genuinely upset if it disappeared — that's demand.
"Everyone in my field needs this" means you haven't found anyone specific yet. The more universal you think the need is, the less validated it actually is.
The status quo is your real competitor — not the other startup. It's the spreadsheet-and-email workaround people already live with. You have to be dramatically better than "good enough."

Validation Levels

Level 1: Problem Validation (Do People Have This Problem?)

Before you validate your solution, validate that the problem exists and is painful enough to pay for.

Where to look for evidence:

SourceWhat to Look For
Reddit, forums, communitiesPeople complaining about the problem repeatedly
Google TrendsSearch volume for problem-related terms
Competitor reviews (G2, Capterra)1-3 star reviews mentioning unmet needs
Twitter/XPeople publicly frustrated with current solutions
Your own experienceYou've felt this pain yourself (strongest signal)

Tell AI:

Research the problem of [describe the problem].
Find evidence that people are actively looking for solutions:
- Search volume for related terms
- Reddit/forum threads where people discuss this pain
- Competitors that exist (even partial solutions)
- How much people currently pay to solve this (or workarounds they use)
Summarize: Is this a real, painful, frequent problem?

Level 2: Solution Validation (Will People Want YOUR Solution?)

The Mom Test — Never ask leading questions. Instead:

Bad QuestionGood Question
"Would you use an app that does X?""How do you currently handle X?"
"Would you pay for this?""What do you spend on solving X today?"
"Do you think this is a good idea?""Tell me about the last time X was a problem."
"Would this be useful?""What have you tried? What didn't work?"

Conversation template:

1. "What's the hardest part about [area]?"
2. "Tell me about the last time that happened."
3. "How did you deal with it?"
4. "What didn't work about that solution?"
5. "If you could wave a magic wand, what would change?"
6. "How much time/money does this cost you today?"

Talk to 10-15 potential customers. If 8+ describe the same pain with intensity, you have signal.

Level 3: Willingness to Pay (Will They Open Their Wallets?)

The strongest validation signals, ranked:

SignalStrength
They pre-pay before the product existsStrongest
They sign up for a waitlist with a credit cardVery strong
They sign up for a waitlist with emailStrong
They click a "Buy" button (fake door test)Moderate
They say "I'd definitely pay for that"Weak
They say "That's a cool idea"Worthless

For Domain Experts: Your Network Is Your Validation Lab

If you're a [profession] building for other [professionals], you already have what most founders spend months trying to get: direct access to target customers.

  • Skip the cold outreach. Message 10 peers you actually know: "Hey, how do you handle [pain]? I'm thinking about building something."
  • You've already had 1,000 customer conversations. Mine your memory: what do colleagues complain about at conferences, in group chats, over lunch?
  • Your professional associations are focus groups. Post in the group: "Quick question — how long does [task] take you?" Count the replies.
  • Validate in days, not weeks. You don't need to "find" your market. You're standing in it.

See translate skill for identifying which pain is worth building for, and niche-advantage for leveraging your professional network.


Smoke Tests (Validate Without Building)

Landing Page Test

Create a landing page describing your product. Drive traffic. Measure signups.

Tell AI:

Create a landing page for [product idea] that:
- Clearly describes the problem and solution
- Has a CTA: "Join the waitlist" or "Get early access"
- Collects email addresses
- Optionally asks 1-2 qualifying questions (role, company size)
Target: 100 visitors, measure signup rate.

Benchmarks:

  • < 5% signup rate → Weak interest. Rethink positioning or audience.
  • 5-15% signup rate → Moderate interest. Worth exploring further.
  • 15%+ signup rate → Strong signal. Build an MVP.

Fake Door Test

Add a button or link for a feature that doesn't exist yet. Measure clicks.

1. Create a CTA for the feature: "Try [Feature Name]"
2. When clicked, show: "This feature is coming soon!
   Sign up to be the first to know."
3. Collect email.
4. Measure click rate.

Pre-Sale Test

Offer the product at a discount before it exists. If people pay, you have validation.

"[Product] launches in [timeframe]. Get 50% off as a founding member.
$X/month (normally $Y/month). Cancel anytime."

If 10+ strangers pay, build it. If 0 pay, pivot.


Go / No-Go Decision Framework

After running validation experiments, score your idea:

Validation Scorecard:
                                          Score (1-5)
Problem frequency (daily=5, yearly=1):    ___
Problem intensity (hair on fire=5):       ___
Willingness to pay (pre-paid=5):          ___
Market size (>$1B TAM=5):                 ___
Your unique advantage (deep=5):           ___
Current solutions (none/bad=5):           ___
                                   Total: ___/30

25-30: Strong go. Build the MVP.
18-24: Promising. Run one more validation experiment.
12-17: Weak. Pivot the angle or audience.
<12:   No go. Find a different problem.

Where to Find People to Validate With

ChannelCostSpeedQuality
Your personal networkFreeFastMedium (biased)
Reddit / niche communitiesFreeMediumHigh (real users)
Twitter/X DMs to people with the problemFreeMediumHigh
Facebook/LinkedIn groupsFreeMediumMedium
Google Ads to landing page$50-200FastHigh (intent-based)
Cold email to prospectsFreeSlowHigh
Indie Hackers / HNFreeMediumMedium

Tell AI:

Help me find 5 specific online communities where [target audience]
hangs out and discusses [problem area]. For each, give me:
- The community name and link
- How active it is
- Rules about self-promotion
- A non-spammy way to start conversations about [problem]

Validation Timeline

Week 1: Problem research + 5 customer conversations
Week 2: 5 more conversations + landing page live
Week 3: Drive traffic to landing page (100+ visitors)
Week 4: Analyze results, make go/no-go decision

Total cost: $0-200
Total time: 10-15 hours

Common Mistakes

MistakeFix
Building before validatingSpend $0 and 2 weeks on validation before writing any code
Asking friends and familyTalk to strangers who match your target customer
Asking "Would you use this?"Ask about their current behavior and spending
Taking "That's a cool idea" as validationOnly actions count: signups, pre-payments, clicks
Validating once and stoppingRe-validate at every stage (pricing, features, positioning)
Giving up after 3 conversationsTalk to at least 10-15 people before deciding
Over-validating (analysis paralysis)Set a deadline. Decide by week 4

Success Looks Like

  • Clear evidence of demand before writing a single line of code
  • 10+ customer conversations documented with recurring pain points
  • Landing page with measurable signup rate
  • Go/no-go decision backed by data, not gut feeling
  • Confidence that you're building something people will pay for

Related Skills

  • translate — Turn your professional expertise into a product spec (start here if you're a domain expert)
  • niche-advantage — Leverage your industry network and credibility for distribution
  • customer-research — Go deeper with interviews and personas
  • market-research — Size the market and analyze competitors
  • landing-page — Build the landing page for your smoke test
  • plan — Write the spec once you've validated the idea
  • pricing — Validate willingness to pay alongside demand

适合场景

01

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

02

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

03

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

Codex

37.14%
按下载量换算35

Claude

30.45%
按下载量换算28

Cursor

19.77%
按下载量换算18

Gemini CLI

10.1%
按下载量换算9

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

可疑

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

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 warning/failed 结果,不能写成本站确认安全。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills