用 Codex 或 Claude 帮你安装 复制这段 Prompt,粘贴到 Codex、Claude 或其他助手里,让它检查 Skill 页面并帮你完成安装。
直接命令不会经过审查 Prompt;运行前请先检查来源。
npx skills add https://github.com/patrickking67/godmode --skill gospel命令会保持在同一行。复制前请横向滚动并检查完整内容。
想先保存到本地?可下载 SkillsMP 当前能够提供的文件。
基于 SOC 职业分类
正在显示 SKILL.md
| name | gospel |
| description | Explain how a file, symbol, function, flow, or error works. |
Explain what $ARGUMENTS actually does by reading the real code paths, not by guessing,
and report it back at the right altitude: the gist first, then the detail that matters.
$ARGUMENTS is one of: a file path, a symbol or function name, a concept, or a pasted
error or stack trace. Figure out which before doing anything else:
Grep for its definition (not just call sites) and locate it.Grep/Glob, then read.If the target is genuinely ambiguous, state your best interpretation and proceed.
Follow the real code, not what the names imply. Read the definition, then follow what it
calls, what calls it, and the data it touches, far enough to explain the behavior, no
further. For a large or cross-cutting flow, dispatch the Explore agent to map the path
rather than reading every file yourself. Note the actual conditionals, error handling, and
edge cases; do not paper over branches you did not read.
If the question is about a third-party library, framework, SDK, CLI, or cloud service, your training data may be stale. Use the bundled documentation tools instead of relying on memory: Context7 for general libraries and frameworks, Microsoft Learn for Microsoft/Azure topics. Ground the explanation in what the docs say for the version in use.
Do not stop at the symptom. Identify the originating frame, explain why it fires (the
specific state or input that triggers it), and distinguish the root cause from where it
surfaced. Then give the concrete fix: the exact change, at the exact path:line.
Lead with a one- or two-sentence plain-English summary, then the detail:
path:line references at
each point that matters.Explain what the code does, not what it is probably supposed to do. If the code looks buggy or contradicts its own naming, say so. If you could not trace part of it, say that plainly rather than filling the gap with a guess.