🗑️ remove(skills): retire unsupported skill entries

This commit is contained in:
csh
2026-07-22 17:41:37 +08:00
parent 736663a0b0
commit 67cab60a9f
5 changed files with 3 additions and 95 deletions
-1
View File
@@ -89,7 +89,6 @@ Layer 1: rulesets/ (≤50 行/语言,模板源)
Layer 2: skills/ (按需加载,$skill-name 触发)
├─ commit-message: 提交信息规范
├─ style-cleanup: 代码风格整理
├─ tsl-syntax-reference: TSL 语法条目、写法验证和错误边界
├─ tsl-api-reference: TSL API 名称、签名、参数和返回值
└─ thirdparty/: 第三方同步 skills
+2 -2
View File
@@ -65,7 +65,7 @@ python scripts/playbook.py -config playbook.toml
```toml
[install_skills]
mode = list
skills = [style-cleanup, commit-message]
skills = [commit-message]
agents_home = ~/.claude # 或 ~/.agents
```
@@ -88,7 +88,7 @@ python <playbook_root>/scripts/playbook.py -config playbook.toml
### 3. 使用方式
- 在对话中通过 `$<skill-name>` 直接点名触发(例如:`$style-cleanup`
- 在对话中通过 `$<skill-name>` 直接点名触发(例如:`$commit-message`
- Codex TUI:可用 `/skills` 浏览与插入
- Claude Code:通过 `/skills` 命令或直接在对话中触发
+1 -3
View File
@@ -11,10 +11,8 @@
| Skill | 作用 | 典型场景 |
| ------------------------ | ----------------------------------------------------------------------------------- | --------------------------------------------------------------------- |
| `bulk-refactor-workflow` | 大规模重构工作流:符号重命名、API 迁移、安全机械变更 | 跨多文件重命名、API 替换、批量代码转换 |
| `commit-message` | 根据 staged diff 生成符合仓库规范的提交信息,并判断是否应拆分提交 | 写 commit message、检查 staged 改动是否适合一个提交 |
| `gitea-fix-ci` | 基于 Gitea Actions run/job/log 诊断失败 CI,先形成修复计划再改代码 | Gitea PR checks 失败、远端 CI 红但本地需要定位 |
| `style-cleanup` | 使用仓库既有 formatter/linter 做格式和 lint 收尾,不改变语义 | 格式化、lint cleanup、代码改完后的风格整理 |
| `gitea-fix-ci` | 基于 Gitea Actions run/job/log 诊断失败 CI,先形成修复计划再改代码;含 `fetch_ci_logs.py` 取证脚本 | Gitea PR checks 失败、远端 CI 红但本地需要定位 |
| `tsl-syntax-reference` | 查询 TSL 语法条目,验证具体写法和错误边界;不负责 API、命名、风格、工具链或模块集成 | 写/改/审 TSL 时确认语言结构、表达式、控制流、对象模型和语法限制 |
| `tsl-api-reference` | 查询随 skill 分发的 TSL API 参考:按名精确查条目,或按中文关键词发现候选 | 写/审 TSL 时确认 builtin、dotnet、模块 API 的签名、参数、返回值和示例 |
-88
View File
@@ -1,88 +0,0 @@
---
name: style-cleanup
description: Use when the user asks to format code, fix lint issues, or align style with the repository's existing toolchain without changing behavior.
---
# Style Cleanup
## Overview
Use the repository's own formatter and lint contracts without changing behavior.
Keep the requested scope, preserve Git state, and prove the resulting diff is
style-only.
## Use Boundary
Use for requested formatting, lint cleanup, or a final style pass. Do not use for
semantic refactors, new tool configuration, or full-repo reformatting without
explicit scope.
## Workflow
1. **Fix the scope and preserve Git state**
Record `git status --short`. Resolve targets, then inspect
`git diff --cached -- <targets>` and `git diff -- <targets>` separately.
Default to changed files. If a staged-only target is partially staged, stop and
ask because formatters edit the whole working-tree file. Never stage, unstage,
commit, or discard changes unless requested.
2. **Resolve authority in this order**
User instructions and agreed scope → nearest project instructions and canonical
repo/CI commands → checked-in tool config → vendored Playbook defaults. A higher
source wins; report conflicts instead of combining rules.
3. **Choose commands from repository evidence**
Use a canonical repo entrypoint as one unit. Otherwise select only configured
tools for target languages; there is no universal formatter/linter order. Run a
non-mutating check first when available, then scoped configured fixers. If a tool
is missing, report and stop—do not install tools or invent config.
4. **Apply and control the blast radius**
Record the initial diff summary and run the chosen commands. If files outside
scope change, stop and report them; do not widen scope or silently revert.
5. **Verify**
Inspect final cached and working-tree diffs and confirm the index is unchanged.
Run `git diff --check`; rerun the formatter/check for idempotence. If a fixer
changes tokens, imports, structure, or any non-style hunk, run relevant behavior
tests. Without tests, report behavior preservation as unverified.
## Playbook as Authority
Use these only when no higher-priority project rule conflicts:
- TSL: `docs/tsl/code_style.md`, `docs/tsl/naming.md`, `docs/tsl/toolchain.md`
- C++: `docs/cpp/code_style.md`, `docs/cpp/naming.md`, `docs/cpp/toolchain.md`
- Python: `docs/python/style_guide.md`, `docs/python/tooling.md`,
`docs/python/configuration.md`
## Output Contract
Report `Scope`, `Authority`, `Commands`, `Git State`, `Changes`, `Verification`,
and `Remaining`. Include before/after staged state, diff size, idempotence, checks,
behavior tests, and anything unverified.
## Quick Reference
| Situation | Action |
| --- | --- |
| Canonical command exists | Use it; do not build a parallel pipeline |
| Staged-only target is partial | Stop and ask |
| Tool expands scope | Stop and report; do not silently revert |
| Non-style hunk appears | Test behavior or report it unverified |
| Tool is missing | Report and stop |
Example: if `package.json` defines `lint:fix`, use that canonical entrypoint for
the requested JS files; do not add a separate Prettier pass unless project
instructions require it.
## Common Mistakes
- Running familiar tools instead of the repository-selected entrypoint
- Giving Playbook defaults priority over project instructions or config
- Staging changes, widening scope, or claiming success without final diff review
-1
View File
@@ -91,7 +91,6 @@
| `brooks-review` | 代码类 Plan 完成后,归档前需要审查 | diff / PR 级代码审查 |
| `brooks-test` | 测试改动复杂,或需要确认测试质量 | 测试有效性、覆盖边界、断言质量审查 |
| `gitea-fix-ci` | Gitea Actions 失败 | 拉取 CI 日志、定位失败、形成修复计划 |
| `style-cleanup` | 代码实现后需要格式或 lint 收尾 | 格式化、lint cleanup,不改变语义 |
| `commit-message` | 需要提交或归档当前 Plan 改动 | commit message 生成与 staged diff 检查 |
### Plan 要求