菜单
Clarify the user’s intent for vague, incomplete, or ambiguous clauses, statements, and requirements before modifying the code. Reports omit empty sections — no placeholder headings, empty tables, or negative statements like "no issues found".
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。
基于 SOC 职业分类
Run all 12 TypeScript code quality hunters in parallel as subagents and write each report to a timestamped reports folder. Covers boundary, doc, error, invariant, perf, security, simplicity, slop, smell, solid, test, and type hunters. Use when: running a full TypeScript codebase audit, scanning all quality dimensions at once, preparing for a code review, or generating a comprehensive findings report.
Audit TypeScript code for unnecessary structural complexity — duplication, avoidable abstractions, dead logic paths, flag-heavy APIs, deep nesting, mixed concerns, and coexisting abstraction generations left behind by unfinished migrations. Recommends the simplest shape that preserves intended behavior. Use when: reviewing TypeScript code for over-engineering, reducing complexity after prototyping, enforcing reuse over addition, simplifying before a refactor, or auditing a codebase after a framework or library migration.
Grilling session that challenges your requirements against the existing codebase. Reports omit empty sections — no placeholder headings, empty tables, or negative statements like "no issues found".
Audit Go packages for boundary violations — leaked internals via exports, coupling through shared types, import cycles, missing internal/ packages, over-exported APIs, and dependency direction violations. Use when: reviewing package structure, shrinking public API surface, enforcing encapsulation, preparing packages for replacement, or untangling tight coupling between layers.
Audit Go code for missing documentation where the "why" is not obvious — obscure calculations, non-trivial business rules, surprising behavior, implicit constraints, workarounds, and missing godoc on exported symbols. Finds where a comment would save the next reader significant time. Use when: reviewing Go code for long-term maintainability, onboarding new team members, auditing undocumented business logic, or preparing code for handoff.
Audit Go code for weak invariants — unchecked errors, nil pointer risks, ignored context cancellation, unsafe type assertions, zero-value traps, panic/recover misuse, and missing validation at construction boundaries. Use when: tightening domain models, reducing panic risks, increasing error handling discipline, or establishing a safety baseline before refactoring.
| name | grill-light |
| description | Clarify the user’s intent for vague, incomplete, or ambiguous clauses, statements, and requirements before modifying the code. Reports omit empty sections — no placeholder headings, empty tables, or negative statements like "no issues found". |
| disable-model-invocation | true |
Help turn unclear or vague ideas into fully formed execution plan through natural collaborative dialogue.
Start by understanding the current project context, then ask questions to refine the idea. Weak assumptions and underestimated risks are unacceptable—call them out or resolve them.
The goal of this session is a direct implementation plan that can be executed with minimal further clarification.
Extract:
Assess if the request mixes multiple high-level concepts. If yes, propose usint the grill-hard skill to produce details
specification artefact. If the user insists on a single task, identify the main theme and defer other themes as "future work" or "out of scope" with clear rationale.
After the interview, present the synthesized requirements to the user for implementation approval.
