Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索只读github未标认证来源可访问clear审计未展示

work-summary工作总结

Agent Skill

work-summary 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

539

周安装

22

GitHub Stars

公开资料未说明

下载量

172
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

MIT

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:work-summary(工作总结)
来源仓库:https://github.com/fuzhiyu/researchprojecttemplate
仓库路径:skills/work-summary
安装命令:
npx skills add fuzhiyu/researchprojecttemplate --skill "work-summary"
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。

AgentSkills.tonpx skills
npx skills add fuzhiyu/researchprojecttemplate --skill "work-summary"

简介

work-summary 用于检索工作总结类资料和项目复盘资源。

  • 适合在 Codex、Claude 等平台中辅助撰写报告或提炼要点。
  • 通过 npx skills add fuzhiyu/researchprojecttemplate --skill "work-summary" 安装。
  • 需注意不同行业总结模板差异,不可直接套用通用框架。
  • 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。

SKILL.md

Work Summary Skill

Create factual working journal entries that document completed analysis work without interpretation or recommendations.

When to Use

Activate when user requests:

  • "Summarize the work"
  • "Document the results"
  • "Create a working journal entry"
  • "Write up the analysis"

Instructions

Step 1: Verify Git Commit

Check if code has been committed:

git status

If uncommitted changes exist:

  1. Inform user: "I see uncommitted changes. Should I run the code-quality-reviewer agent and commit the code first?"
  2. Wait for user confirmation
  3. If confirmed, use Task tool with subagent_type="code-quality-reviewer" then assist with git commit
  4. Get commit info: git log -1 --pretty=format:"%H%n%s"

If clean: Get latest commit: git log -1 --pretty=format:"%H%n%s"

Step 2: Confirm Understanding

If you have context from recent work:

  • Summarize your understanding of objective, code location, output location
  • Use AskUserQuestion tool to confirm with user

If you don't have context:

  • Ask user for: objective, code location, output location

Then read code files, output files, and documentation to gather information.

Step 3: Handle Figures

If figures exist in output folder:

mkdir -p Notes/WorkingJournal/attachments
cp Output/[subfolder]/figure.png Notes/WorkingJournal/attachments/YYYY-MM-DD-description.png

In markdown:

![Descriptive caption](./attachments/YYYY-MM-DD-description.png)

Source: [Original](../../Output/[subfolder]/figure.png)

Step 4: Create Working Journal Entry

Filename: Notes/WorkingJournal/YYYY-MM-DD-[Author]-[Description].md

Front Matter:

---
author: "[[Author]]"
date: YYYY-MM-DD
project: "[[IntermediaryDemand]]"
git_commit: [full hash if available]
git_message: "[message if available]"
permalink: working-journal/YYYY-MM-DD-author-description
---

Step 5: Write Summary

Structure can be flexible, but typically include:

  • Objective section
  • Summary of what was done
  • Data description
  • Methodology description
  • Results with tables/figures
  • Technical implementation details (code and outputs)

Use relative paths from Notes/WorkingJournal/:

  • Code: ../../Code/
  • Output: ../../Output/
  • Data: ../../Data/

Critical Rules - MUST FOLLOW

1. Be Factual and Objective

✓ DO:

  • State what was done and what was found
  • Report numerical results precisely
  • Describe methods used
  • Link every claim to source (code, output, documentation)

✗ DO NOT:

  • Interpret economic meaning without user request
  • Speculate on causes or implications
  • Make recommendations or suggest next steps
  • Use subjective assessments ("excellent", "poor", "successful")

2. Examples

Good (Factual):

  • "Processed 4.7M holdings from 11,857 submissions"
  • "Difference of -30% (-$243B)"
  • "Front-end tenors within 7% of benchmark"
  • "Classification success rate: 70% (3,988 of 5,699)"

Bad (Speculative/Interpretive):

  • "This suggests the classification is insufficient"
  • "The results indicate strong performance"
  • "This likely means we should use BKMS data"
  • "The excellent match validates our approach"

3. Cite Everything

Every claim must link to supporting evidence:

  • [descriptive text](../../path/to/file)
  • Code files for methodology
  • Output files for results
  • Documentation for data sources

4. Figures

  • Copy to attachments/ with descriptive filename
  • Cite original source location
  • Use descriptive captions

Step 6: Verify Report Quality

After creating the report, use the report-checker agent to verify quality:

Use Task tool with subagent_type="report-checker"
Pass: report path, code location, output location, objective

The agent will check:

  • All claims are cited and accurate
  • No speculation or unsupported interpretation
  • Numbers match source files
  • No subjective language

If issues found, revise the report before finalizing.

After Creating

  1. Tell user the file path
  2. List what was documented
  3. Report any issues found by report-checker
  4. Ask: "Would you like me to add any specific information?"
  5. Do NOT suggest interpretations or next steps unless asked

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

04

需要参考平台分布和安装热度时

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

补充不同宿主或平台的使用分布数据

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

Claude Code

31.62%
按下载量换算54

OpenCode

24.47%
按下载量换算42

windsurf

16.89%
按下载量换算29

Codex

12.44%
按下载量换算21

Antigravity

7.41%
按下载量换算13

Gemini CLI

3.29%
按下载量换算6

安全审计

暂无安全审计结果可展示。

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。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