‹ 首页

analyze

@clawic · 收录于 昨天 · 上游提交 2 天前

Structured analysis for any input. Data, code, text, decisions, visuals. Prioritize, question, conclude.

适合你,如果你经常需要从杂乱信息中提取重点

/ 通过 npx 安装 校验哈希
npx oh-my-skill add clawic/skills/analyze
/ 通过 bash 安装
curl -fsSL https://oh-my-skill.com/install.sh | bash -s -- clawic/skills/analyze
/ 已经装过?验证本机副本,不用重装
npx oh-my-skill verify clawic/skills/analyze
安装目标可用 --agent / --scope 或 --to 明确指定;省略时只会在唯一已存在的 agent 目录上自动选择,零命中或多命中会停止并提示。content_hash 缺失或不一致均拒装。
14GitHub stars
~448最小装载
~448含声明引用
~481文本包总量
索引托管

怎么用

商店整理自技能原文 · 版本 f825206 · 表述以原文为准
它做什么

装上后,Claude 会按「目的→结构→分析→优先级→结论」的流程处理输入,标记信息来源,区分事实与观点,并主动寻找反证。

什么时候触发

当你提供数据、代码、文本、决策或视觉材料需要分析,或要求结构化评估时触发。

装好后可以这样说
Claude会运用框架分析并标记来源
Claude会专注于生产破坏和死代码
技能原文 SKILL.md作者撰写 · MIT · f825206
Pattern
Purpose → Structure → Analyze → Prioritize → Conclude

Before analyzing: State what decision this serves. Pick a framework. Note first impression to challenge later.

Before
  • Purpose in one line: "This analysis helps decide ___"
  • What's missing: 3+ unknowns that would change conclusions
  • First impression: Write it — then seek counter-evidence
During
  • Prioritize always: 🔴 Critical (1-2 max) · 🟡 Important (2-3) · ⚪ Minor
  • Mark sources: Every claim gets [from input] or [inferred]
  • Seek disconfirmation: Dedicate space to "why I might be wrong"
  • Distinguish: Facts vs opinions. Correlation vs causation.
After
  • One-line summary: Force analysis into one sentence
  • So what?: End with action, not summary
  • Obviousness test: Would someone say this without reading? → Deeper
Traps
  • Superficial: Paraphrasing ≠ analysis
  • Equal weight: Everything yellow = nothing prioritized
  • Confirmation bias: First impression became conclusion
  • Missing denominator: "500 cancellations" of 600 or 50,000?
  • Invented data: Stats without source = hallucination
By Domain

| Domain | Focus | Watch | |--------|-------|-------| | Data | Grain, missing, outliers | Centinels, mixed types | | Code | Production breaks, dead code | Style ≠ bugs | | Text | Thesis, evidence strength | Unsourced claims | | Decisions | Unlisted options, reversibility | Status quo bias | | Visual | Dominance, consistency | Platform conventions |

Frameworks

Pick one before starting:

  • MECE: Mutually exclusive, collectively exhaustive
  • Pros/Cons+: Add reversibility + cost of inaction
  • Pre-mortem: Assume failure — why?
  • Steel man: Best opposing argument
Output
🎯 PURPOSE: Decide [X]
🔴 CRITICAL: [Finding + source]
🟡 IMPORTANT: [Findings]
⚠️ COUNTER: [Contradictions]
➡️ ACTION: [Recommendation]

Channels, not teaches. Ensures prioritization, questioning, and conclusions.

按 MIT 许可原样转载,未经改动 · 在 GitHub 查看 →

评论

登录即可评论;带「已验证安装」的,是发布者名下有本店的安装或持有记录。