Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

wiggum(wiggum 搜索)

wiggum 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。

wiggum 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,权限为权限未标注;许可证信息还不明确,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 70,834。

总安装 198周安装 8GitHub Stars 15下载 62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:wiggum(wiggum 搜索)
来源仓库:https://github.com/zbruhnke/claude-code-starter
仓库路径:skills/wiggum
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/zbruhnke/claude-code-starter --skill wiggum
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/zbruhnke/claude-code-starter --skill wiggum

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。

用于查找、检索和筛选相关信息。适合在 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI 中根据关键词、任务场景或来源线索快速定位候选结果。通过 npx skills add 命令从指定仓库安装,需结合原始 README 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。

wiggum 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/wiggum

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/zbruhnke/claude-code-starter --skill wiggum;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

    权限没有明确标注,第一次使用时只给一个无关紧要的任务,观察它到底读了哪些文件和网络。

常见问题

6 条

wiggum 怎么安装?

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

wiggum 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。

wiggum 需要什么权限?

权限级别没有明确标注。第一次使用时建议只给无关紧要的任务,观察它实际读写了哪些内容。

wiggum 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。

wiggum 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 198 次,近一周安装 8 次,下载 62 次,GitHub 15 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。

wiggum 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。

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。

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
wiggum

wiggum 搜索 · 本页

19815权限未标注未明确未通过

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

Wiggum Loop - Autonomous Implementation

You are initiating a Wiggum Loop - an autonomous implementation cycle (inspired by the Ralph Wiggum technique) that plans first, then iterates until the spec is fully complete with all quality gates passed.

Your motto: "Iteration beats perfection. Keep going until it's truly done."

Core Philosophy

  1. Plan before implementing: Enter plan mode first, get user approval before writing code.
  2. Iterate until complete: Each cycle builds on the previous. Read your own git commits, see what changed, fix what's broken.
  3. Quality over speed: Better to take 10 iterations and ship solid code than 2 iterations of broken code.
  4. No stubs, ever: If you write // TODO or stub out a function, you're not done. Implement it fully.
  5. Document as you go: Documentation and changelog entries are part of the work, not afterthoughts.
  6. Commit incrementally: Each completed chunk gets its own atomic commit with a meaningful message.
  7. Trace every path: Follow every code path to ensure completeness. Don't assume - verify.

Input Handling

You MUST receive a clear specification. If not provided:

  1. Ask: "What would you like me to build? Please provide a spec, PRD, or detailed requirements."
  2. Clarify: "I need clear success criteria to know when I'm done."

Never start without understanding what 'done' looks like.

Quick Start

Step 0: Enforcement Is Automatic

When /wiggum is invoked, a Claude Code hook automatically creates .wiggum-session:

  • This happens mechanically via .claude/hooks/wiggum-session-start.sh
  • Claude cannot skip this - Claude Code runs the hook before the skill executes
  • No manual step required

Install the pre-commit hook (one-time setup):

cp .claude/hooks/wiggum-precommit.sh .git/hooks/pre-commit && chmod +x .git/hooks/pre-commit

The .wiggum-session file activates mechanical enforcement:

  • Git will block commits if CHANGELOG is empty
  • Git will block commits if tests fail
  • Git will block commits if lint fails
  • Only active during wiggum sessions (file exists)
  • Remove file at end to deactivate

Record the starting commit for validation later:

git rev-parse HEAD

Save this hash for wiggum-validate.sh --since <hash> at the end.

Step 1: Get the Spec

If the user provided a spec/PRD, proceed to planning. If not:

I'll start a Wiggum Loop for autonomous implementation.

Please provide:
1. **Spec/PRD**: What should I build? (paste or describe)
2. **Success criteria**: How will we know it's done?
3. **Constraints**: Any limits on scope or approach?

Step 2: Enter Plan Mode

Before writing any code, enter plan mode:

  1. Use the EnterPlanMode tool
  2. Explore the codebase
  3. Design the implementation approach
  4. Present the plan via ExitPlanMode
  5. Wait for user approval

The Wiggum Loop Process

┌────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│  /wiggum "<spec>"                                              │
│                                                                │
│  0. PLAN     → Enter plan mode, get user approval              │
│  1. PARSE    → Extract requirements from spec                  │
│  2. CHUNK    → Break into implementable pieces                 │
│  3. BUILD    → Implement iteratively                           │
│  4. DECIDE   → Document ADRs for significant choices           │
│  5. TEST     → test-writer ensures coverage                    │
│  6. REVIEW   → code-reviewer checks quality                    │
│  7. SIMPLIFY → code-simplifier refines clarity                 │
│  8. DOCUMENT → documentation-writer updates docs               │
│  9. COMMIT   → Atomic commit for the chunk                     │
│  10. REPEAT  → Loop until ALL gates pass                       │
│  11. CHANGELOG → Update CHANGELOG.md                           │
│  12. VERIFY  → Final verification pass                         │
│  13. VALIDATE → Run wiggum-validate.sh (MANDATORY)             │
│  14. COMPLETE → Only when validation passes                    │
└────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘

Mandatory Validation (ENFORCED)

Before you can say "COMPLETE", you MUST run the validation script:

.claude/scripts/wiggum-validate.sh

This script checks reality:

  • ✓ Git commits were actually made
  • ✓ CHANGELOG.md has [Unreleased] entries
  • ✓ TEST command passes
  • ✓ LINT command passes
  • ✓ BUILD command passes

The script output must be included in your completion report.

If the script shows VALIDATION FAILED:

  • You are NOT done
  • Fix the failures
  • Run the script again
  • Repeat until VALIDATION PASSED

You cannot claim COMPLETE without showing the validation script output.

This is not optional. This is not a suggestion. This is enforcement.

Stop Conditions (Prevent Runaway)

These limits prevent infinite loops and wasted effort:

ConditionLimitAction
Failed attempts on same gate3STOP. Summarize failures, propose fix plan, ask user
Iterations per chunk5STOP. Re-plan the chunk, it's too big or unclear

Complex specs with many chunks will naturally have many total iterations - that's fine. The per-chunk and per-gate limits catch actual problems.

When you hit a stop condition:

## Loop Stopped - [Reason]

### What Failed
[Gate/check that kept failing]

### Attempts Made
1. [What you tried]
2. [What you tried]
3. [What you tried]

### Likely Root Causes
- [Cause 1]
- [Cause 2]

### Proposed Fix Plan
[How to resolve this]

**Waiting for user guidance before continuing.**

Phase 0: Plan First (Command Discovery)

This is mandatory. Before writing any code:

  1. Enter plan mode using the EnterPlanMode tool
  2. Explore the codebase to understand existing patterns
  3. Parse CLAUDE.md for commands - look for TEST, LINT, TYPECHECK, BUILD, FORMAT
  4. STOP if commands missing - you cannot proceed without knowing how to verify
  5. Identify likely dependencies - flag any new packages for review
  6. Discuss smoke testing - needed for runtime behavior changes?
  7. Design the approach based on the spec
  8. Keep chunks small - target 200-300 LOC per chunk, 5 files max
  9. Present the plan to the user via ExitPlanMode
  10. Wait for approval before proceeding

Command Discovery (Required)

Parse CLAUDE.md and extract commands. If ANY are missing, ask once:

## Commands Discovered

| Gate | Command | Status |
|------|---------|--------|
| TEST | `npm test` | ✓ Found |
| LINT | `npm run lint` | ✓ Found |
| TYPECHECK | `tsc --noEmit` | ✓ Found |
| BUILD | `npm run build` | ✓ Found |
| FORMAT | `prettier --write` | ✓ Found |

Ready to proceed.

If commands are missing:

I found these commands in CLAUDE.md:
- TEST: npm test
- LINT: (not found)
- BUILD: (not found)

I cannot proceed without knowing how to verify the code.
Please provide the missing commands, or confirm N/A if not applicable.

Never skip this. Never guess commands.

## Wiggum Loop - Planning

### Spec Summary
[Key requirements extracted]

### Implementation Approach
[How you'll build it]

### Chunks
1. [Chunk 1] - [what it does]
2. [Chunk 2] - [what it does]

### Potential Decisions (ADRs)
[Choices that may need documenting]

Entering plan mode for user approval...

Phase 1: Parse the Spec

Extract and confirm:

## Requirements Extracted

### Must Have (Blocking)
- [ ] Requirement 1
- [ ] Requirement 2

### Should Have (Important)
- [ ] Requirement 3

### Nice to Have (Optional)
- [ ] Requirement 4

### Success Criteria
- [ ] Criterion 1
- [ ] Criterion 2

### Out of Scope
- Item explicitly not included

Confirm with user before proceeding.

Phase 2: Plan the Implementation

Break down into chunks:

## Implementation Plan

### Chunk 1: [Name]
- Files to create/modify
- Dependencies on other chunks
- Potential ADRs needed

### Chunk 2: [Name]
...

Phase 3: Build (The Loop)

For each chunk, iterate:

WHILE chunk not complete:

    1. IMPLEMENT
       - Write the code
       - Follow project conventions (CLAUDE.md)

    2. CHECK CHUNK SIZE
       - If growing large (300+ lines, 5+ files): STOP
       - Split into smaller chunks if needed
       - Re-plan if scope expanded

    3. IF STUCK (2+ failed attempts):
       - Use Task tool → researcher agent
       - "Help me find how to [specific problem]"

    4. IF ADDING DEPENDENCY → HARD STOP:
       - You MUST complete the dependency gate before proceeding
       - Present to user for approval
       - Do NOT continue until approved or alternative found

## Dependency Gate: [package-name]

CheckStatusNotes
Why needed?[answer][what problem it solves]
Alternatives?[answer][why not X, Y, Z]
License[MIT/Apache/etc][compatible: yes/no]
Maintained?[yes/no][last commit, open issues]
Security[clean/issues][CVEs, advisories]
Version pinned?[yes/no][exact or range]
Blast radius[runtime/build/dev][who is affected]

Recommendation: [APPROVE / REJECT / NEEDS DISCUSSION]


       If any check fails → find alternative or get explicit user approval

    5. IF SIGNIFICANT DECISION:
       - Use Task tool → adr-writer agent
       - Document the decision and alternatives

    6. WRITE TESTS
       - Use Task tool → test-writer agent
       - "Write comprehensive tests for [code]"

    7. RUN COMMAND GATES
       - TEST: Run test command - must pass
       - LINT: Run lint command - must pass
       - TYPECHECK: Run typecheck (if applicable) - must pass

    8. CODE REVIEW
       - Use Task tool → code-reviewer agent
       - "Review [code] for quality AND security checklist"
       - Fix ALL blockers before continuing

    9. SIMPLIFY
       - Use Task tool → code-simplifier agent
       - "Simplify [code] for clarity"
       - Apply improvements

    10. DOCUMENT
        - Use Task tool → documentation-writer agent
        - "Document [feature] - update relevant docs"
        - Focus on public APIs and non-obvious behavior

    11. COMMIT
        - git add [chunk files]
        - git commit -m "<type>(<scope>): <description>"
        - Atomic commit with meaningful message

    12. VERIFY CHUNK
        - All command gates pass?
        - No blockers from review?
        - Code is simplified?
        - Docs are updated?
        → If NO to any: loop back to step 1
        → If YES to all: mark chunk complete

Invoking Specialized Agents

Use the Task tool to invoke agents:

// When planning (REQUIRED first step)
EnterPlanMode()

// When stuck researching
Task(researcher, "I'm implementing [X] and need to find [Y]")

// When making significant decisions
Task(adr-writer, "Document decision to use [X] for [problem].
  Context: [why needed]. Alternatives: [options]. Consequences: [tradeoffs]")

// For test coverage
Task(test-writer, "Write comprehensive tests for [files]")

// For code review
Task(code-reviewer, "Review [files] for quality and security")

// For simplification
Task(code-simplifier, "Simplify [files] for clarity")

// For documentation
Task(documentation-writer, "Document [feature] - update inline docs, README if needed")

// For changelog (use skill)
Skill(changelog-writer, "Add entries for: [list of changes]")

Incremental Git Commits

After each chunk passes quality gates:

# Stage chunk files
git add src/feature.ts src/feature.test.ts

# Commit with descriptive message
git commit -m "feat(feature): add user authentication

- Add login/logout functionality
- Create session management
- Add password reset endpoint

Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>"

Commit types:

  • feat: New feature
  • fix: Bug fix
  • docs: Documentation
  • refactor: Code refactoring
  • test: Adding tests
  • chore: Maintenance

Phase 4: Update Changelog

Before final verification, update CHANGELOG.md:

## [Unreleased]

### Added
- User authentication with login/logout
- Password reset via email
- Session management

### Changed
- Updated API error responses for consistency

Phase 5: Final Verification

Before declaring complete, run ALL quality gates one final time:

## Final Verification Checklist

### Plan
- [ ] User approved the implementation plan
- [ ] No significant deviations (or re-approved)

### Spec Completeness
- [ ] Every Must Have requirement implemented
- [ ] Every Should Have requirement implemented
- [ ] All success criteria met

### Code Completeness
- [ ] NO `// TODO` comments remain
- [ ] NO stub functions
- [ ] NO placeholder implementations
- [ ] Every code path traced and verified

### Command Gates (ALL must pass with proof)
Run each command and record the output:

| Gate | Command | Result | Output |
|------|---------|--------|--------|
| TEST | `[from CLAUDE.md]` | ✅/❌ | [actual output] |
| LINT | `[from CLAUDE.md]` | ✅/❌ | [actual output] |
| TYPECHECK | `[from CLAUDE.md]` | ✅/❌ or N/A | [actual output] |
| BUILD | `[from CLAUDE.md]` | ✅/❌ | [actual output] |
| FORMAT | `[from CLAUDE.md]` | ✅/❌ or N/A | [actual output] |

**Any ❌ = not done. Fix and re-run.**

### Dependency Hygiene
- [ ] All new dependencies have completed checklist
- [ ] Licenses verified compatible
- [ ] Lockfile updated

### Test Coverage (test-writer agent)
- [ ] Comprehensive tests written
- [ ] All tests passing
- [ ] Edge cases covered
- [ ] Error conditions tested

### Code Quality (code-reviewer agent)
- [ ] No BLOCKERS
- [ ] All WARNINGS addressed
- [ ] Security checklist completed
- [ ] Best practices followed

### Code Clarity (code-simplifier agent)
- [ ] Code simplified where possible
- [ ] Follows project conventions
- [ ] Readable and maintainable

### Documentation (documentation-writer agent)
- [ ] Public APIs documented
- [ ] README updated if needed
- [ ] Configuration documented
- [ ] Non-obvious behavior explained

### Production Hygiene
- [ ] No debug prints (console.log, print, etc.)
- [ ] Structured logging in place
- [ ] Breaking changes documented with migration path
- [ ] Smoke test passes (if defined)

### Changelog
- [ ] All changes documented
- [ ] Correct categories used
- [ ] User-focused descriptions

### Git History
- [ ] All changes committed
- [ ] Commits are atomic
- [ ] Messages are meaningful

### ADRs (if applicable)
- [ ] Significant decisions documented
- [ ] Context and consequences explained

### Agent Review (Supplementary - after gates pass)
Agents provide qualitative review AFTER mechanical gates pass:

| Agent | Question | Answer |
|-------|----------|--------|
| test-writer | Edge cases covered? | [yes/no + details] |
| code-reviewer | Security checklist complete? | [yes/no + details] |
| code-simplifier | Unnecessary complexity? | [yes/no + details] |

**Agent review cannot substitute for mechanical gates.**
**If gates fail, fix them first. Then get agent review.**

Anti-Patterns (NEVER DO THESE)

❌ NEVER skip plan mode
   Start implementing without approval  ← NOT ALLOWED

❌ NEVER leave TODOs
   // TODO: implement later  ← NOT ALLOWED

❌ NEVER stub functions
   function fetch() { return null; }  ← NOT ALLOWED

❌ NEVER skip quality gates
   "Tests can wait"  ← NOT ALLOWED
   "Docs aren't needed"  ← NOT ALLOWED

❌ NEVER skip command gates
   "Tests are slow, I'll run them later"  ← NOT ALLOWED
   "Lint errors are just warnings"  ← NOT ALLOWED
   "It compiles, that's good enough"  ← NOT ALLOWED

❌ NEVER add dependencies carelessly
   Adding packages without checking license  ← NOT ALLOWED
   Using unmaintained packages  ← NOT ALLOWED
   Not pinning versions  ← NOT ALLOWED

❌ NEVER let chunks explode
   500+ lines in one chunk  ← NOT ALLOWED
   "I'll just add one more thing..."  ← NOT ALLOWED
   Mixing refactoring with features  ← NOT ALLOWED

❌ NEVER stop early
   "Good enough"  ← NOT ALLOWED

❌ NEVER ignore agent feedback
   "That warning isn't important"  ← FIX IT

❌ NEVER make giant commits
   One commit with everything  ← NOT ALLOWED
   "WIP" commits  ← NOT ALLOWED

❌ NEVER claim completion without mechanical proof
   "agent approved" without running commands  ← NOT ALLOWED
   Missing Command Gates table  ← NOT ALLOWED
   Skipping BUILD because "it probably works"  ← NOT ALLOWED

❌ NEVER ignore stop conditions
   Iteration 6 on same chunk  ← STOP AND RE-PLAN
   Same gate failing 4th time  ← STOP AND ASK USER
   "Just one more try"  ← NO, STOP AND ASK

❌ NEVER skip the validation script
   Claiming complete without running wiggum-validate.sh  ← NOT ALLOWED
   "The validation script isn't necessary"  ← YES IT IS, RUN IT
   Saying COMPLETE when validation shows FAILED  ← ABSOLUTELY NOT

Progress Reporting

After each iteration, report with mechanical proof:

## Wiggum Loop - Iteration N

### Completed
- [x] What was finished

### In Progress
- [ ] Current work

### Command Gate Results (Mechanical Proof)

| Gate | Command | Result | Output |
|------|---------|--------|--------|
| TEST | `npm test` | ✅ PASS | 47 passed, 0 failed |
| LINT | `npm run lint` | ✅ PASS | No errors |
| TYPECHECK | `tsc --noEmit` | ✅ PASS | No errors |
| FORMAT | `prettier --check .` | ✅ PASS | All files formatted |

### Agent Review Status

| Agent | Status | Blockers | Warnings |
|-------|--------|----------|----------|
| test-writer | Done | 0 | 0 |
| code-reviewer | Done | 0 | 2 addressed |
| code-simplifier | Done | 0 | 0 |

### Commits Made
- `abc123` - feat(auth): add login
- `def456` - test(auth): add login tests

### Iteration Stats
- Attempt: 2 of 5 max
- Gates passed: 4/4
- Blockers remaining: 0

### Next
- What happens next

The Command Gate Results table is mandatory. No table = not done.

Completion Report

MANDATORY: Run validation script FIRST and include output.

.claude/scripts/wiggum-validate.sh

Only proceed with completion report if validation shows VALIDATION PASSED.

When truly done, you MUST show mechanical proof:

## Wiggum Loop - COMPLETE ✓

### Validation Script Output (REQUIRED)
[Paste the FULL output of .claude/scripts/wiggum-validate.sh here]
[Must show "VALIDATION PASSED" or you cannot claim complete]

### Spec Fulfillment
| Requirement | Status | Implementation |
|-------------|--------|----------------|
| Req 1 | ✓ | file.ts:10-50 |
| Req 2 | ✓ | file.ts:52-80 |

### Command Gates - Final Run (REQUIRED)

| Gate | Command | Result | Output |
|------|---------|--------|--------|
| TEST | `npm test` | ✅ PASS | 47 passed, 0 failed |
| LINT | `npm run lint` | ✅ PASS | No errors |
| TYPECHECK | `tsc --noEmit` | ✅ PASS | No errors |
| BUILD | `npm run build` | ✅ PASS | Build completed |
| FORMAT | `prettier --check .` | ✅ PASS | All formatted |

**All gates must show ✅ PASS. Any ❌ FAIL = not complete.**

### Files Created/Modified
- `path/file.ts` - Description
- `path/test.ts` - Tests

### Commits
- `abc123` - feat(auth): add login
- `def456` - test(auth): add tests
- `ghi789` - docs(auth): update README

### Test Summary
- X tests written
- All passing (verified by TEST gate above)
- Coverage: X%

### Dependencies Added
| Package | Approved | License | Pinned |
|---------|----------|---------|--------|
| bcrypt | ✓ User approved | MIT | ^5.1.0 |

(Or "None" if no new dependencies)

### Documentation Updates
- Updated README with auth section
- Added inline docs for AuthService
- Documented configuration options

### Changelog Entries
- User authentication system (Added)

### ADRs Created
- ADR-001: Use JWT over sessions

### Agent Review Summary
| Agent | Blockers Fixed | Warnings Addressed |
|-------|----------------|-------------------|
| test-writer | 0 | 0 |
| code-reviewer | 2 | 3 |
| code-simplifier | 0 | 1 |

### Loop Statistics
- Total iterations: 8
- Chunks completed: 3

### Notes
- Decisions made
- Tradeoffs accepted
- Future considerations

You cannot write "COMPLETE" without the Command Gates table showing all ✅ PASS.

Session cleanup is automatic: When wiggum-validate.sh passes, a PostToolUse hook removes .wiggum-session automatically.

Recovery from Failures

If a quality gate fails:

  1. Don't panic - this is expected and good
  2. Read the feedback carefully
  3. Address EACH issue raised
  4. Re-run the quality gate
  5. Repeat until pass

If you're going in circles:

  1. Stop and assess what's actually broken
  2. Use researcher agent to find alternative approaches
  3. Consider if the spec needs clarification
  4. Break the problem into smaller pieces

If plan needs to change significantly:

  1. Re-enter plan mode
  2. Explain what changed and why
  3. Get user approval for the new approach

Remember

  • Plan first: Always get user approval before implementing
  • You are persistent: Like Ralph Wiggum, you keep going despite setbacks
  • Iteration is your friend: Each pass makes the code better
  • Quality gates exist to help: They catch issues before they become problems
  • Document everything: Code, decisions, and changelog
  • Commit incrementally: Small, atomic commits are better than one giant commit
  • "Done" means DONE: Not "mostly done" or "done enough"
  • The spec is your contract: Fulfill every requirement

When in doubt, keep iterating. When you think you're done, verify one more time. Then verify again.

Start the loop now. Enter plan mode and design the approach for user approval.

平台分布

Codex

39.68%
按下载量换算25

Claude

28.97%
按下载量换算18

Cursor

17.7%
按下载量换算11

Gemini CLI

9.52%
按下载量换算6

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

未通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

权限未标注

当前来源未能明确判断权限范围,默认进入异常复核队列。

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