plan-before-code

SKILLAI 工具
AI 工具 未标注权限 许可证不明确
安装这个技能

面向 iOS 项目的受控开发工作流:当用户意图是先规划、暂缓改代码、遵循项目 harness、评估是否多 agent 分工,或要求修改前获得批准时使用。它要求代理先只读检查 AGENTS.md、iOS 架构、Xcode scheme、Maestro/验证脚本等上下文,输出具体方案、影响范围、文件归属、验证命令、风险和 agent 拆分建议;只有在当前方案得到明确执行授权后才实现,并遵守 XcodeBuildMCP/xcodebuild、模拟器串行验证和验证产物管理规则。

一句话选型结论

按资料字段整理

plan-before-code是AI 工具类的 Agent Skill,安装方式未标注,权限级别未标注,许可证不明确,有可直接复制的安装命令。技能本质是给模型读的说明书,效果取决于模型与客户端;装完先用一个小任务验证,再放进正式流程。

分类AI 工具 安装方式未标注 权限级别未标注权限 许可证许可证不明确
累计安装 未标注 本周 未标注
GitHub 星标 未标注 仓库 未标注
下载量 未标注 技能市场下载数
权限级别 未标注权限 安装前请确认风险范围
许可证 许可证不明确 未说明

安装

未标注
在支持 Skills 的客户端里执行,装完问一句「你有哪些技能」验证
skillhub install user_104630ff/plan-before-code
  1. 1
    确认客户端支持

    确认你的客户端支持 Skills(Claude、Codex、Cursor 等),并升级到较新的版本。

  2. 2
    拿到技能文件

    执行上面的命令安装;也可以把仓库里的 SKILL.md 手动放进客户端的 skills 目录。

  3. 3
    刷新技能列表

    重新打开客户端,或刷新技能列表,让新放进来的技能被加载。

  4. 4
    验证是否生效

    问一句「你有哪些技能」,确认列表里出现它,再拿一个小任务试跑。

技能档案

AI 工具
字段来自技能仓库与公开索引,中文说明由本站标注
作者 / 维护方user_104630ff仓库 未标注 · 版本 未标注
宿主客户端未标注技能可被这些客户端加载
安装方式未标注安装包 community
权限级别未标注权限安装前请确认风险范围
许可证未说明许可证不明确,商用前请自行确认条款
仓库可用性available技能仓库当前是否可访问
最近核验未标注上游最后核验时间 · 数据更新 1791664144
正文体量7.7 KBSKILL.md 原文大小,越大说明说明书写得越细

典型使用场景

3 类
按分类整理的常见用法,具体以 SKILL.md 为准
组合多个 AI 能力

把写作、检索、总结串成一条流程。

搭工作流

把固定流程做成可重复调用的步骤。

做提示词与评测

整理提示词并对比输出效果。

选择建议

装之前先看这几条
按条目字段给出的判断,不替你决定用不用

值得选的地方

  • 有可直接复制的安装命令,不用自己翻文档找入口。

先想清楚的地方

  • 没有标注权限级别,实际能做什么要装好后确认。
  • 许可证不明确,商用或二次分发前先到仓库确认条款。
  • 没有做站内核验,内容以作者仓库为准。
  • 技能只是说明书,实际效果取决于模型与客户端,装完先用小任务试一遍。

更适合

  • 需要在AI 工具场景里给模型补一套做法的人。
  • 愿意先读一遍 SKILL.md、确认它会让模型做什么的人。

不太适合

  • 对许可证要求很严、必须明确可商用的人。
  • 只想装完就自动变强、不打算看说明书的人。

同类对比

6 个同类
同分类里挑最接近的几条,字段以各自详情页为准
技能权限级别安装方式累计安装宿主客户端安装命令
plan-before-code当前 未标注权限 未标注 未标注 未标注 有
执行计划 只读 GitHub 仓库 151.5 万 Codex、Claude、Cursor 有
Playwright MCP 测试 浏览器控制 ClawHub 市场 136.5 万 OpenClaw 有
完成前的验证 未标注权限 GitHub 仓库 131.9 万 Codex、Claude、Cursor 有
子 Agent 驱动开发 只读 GitHub 仓库 131.2 万 Codex、Claude、Cursor 有
前端设计 执行命令 GitHub 仓库 125.6 万 Codex、Claude、Cursor 有

SKILL.md 全文

7.7 KB
模型实际读到的说明书原文,来自技能仓库

Plan Before Code

Use this workflow for controlled iOS development instead of direct
implementation. Keep the work grounded in the repository's real iOS architecture,
Xcode schemes, simulator/device constraints, and documented harness. Apply the
workflow as three distinct intents:

  1. Establish an implementation plan without editing files.
  2. Assess whether iOS work can be split safely across agents.
  3. Execute only after the user gives explicit approval for the current plan.

Stage 1: Plan Only

When the user asks to determine the development plan first:

  • Do not create, modify, or delete files; run migrations; create commits; or
    start implementation.
  • Read the repo's local rules first: AGENTS.md, iOS architecture docs,
    reliability or harness docs, relevant execution plans, Xcode scheme notes,
    Maestro flows, and verification scripts.
  • Use read-only inspection only: rg, find, sed, git status, git diff --stat, xcodebuild -list, XcodeBuildMCP discovery, and file reads are OK.
    Do not run formatters, generators, migrations, app-changing scripts, or
    commands that mutate DerivedData/results unless the user has approved
    execution.
  • Inspect only the code needed to understand the requested change.
  • Explain the recommended implementation approach, affected areas, expected
    file ownership, harness/verification commands, risks, and open questions.
  • If the repo requires an execution plan for non-trivial work, say where it
    should be created or updated during execution.
  • Ask at most one blocking question if the plan cannot be made safely from local
    context. Otherwise make a reasonable recommendation.

The output should be a concrete plan, not a proposal to start coding. Use this
shape unless the user asks for something shorter:

Recommended approach:
Affected iOS areas:
File ownership:
Harness and verification:
Risks:
Open questions:
Agent split recommendation:

Mention exact commands when known, such as the relevant xcodebuild command,
XcodeBuildMCP build/test action, Maestro flow, snapshot/visual review command,
or project-specific harness script. If the command is unknown, name the file or
directory to inspect during execution instead of inventing one.

Stage 2: Agent Split Assessment

When the user asks whether the work can be split across multiple agents:

  • Assess coupling, shared files, dependency order, and verification bottlenecks.
  • Recommend one agent when the work is tightly coupled, has one critical file
    cluster, or would create merge conflicts.
  • Recommend multiple agents only when tasks have clear, disjoint ownership and
    can run in parallel without blocking each other.
  • If recommending multiple agents, define each agent's responsibility, write
    scope, expected output, integration order, and what must stay serial.
  • Respect repo harness constraints. For example, if flows share one simulator,
    verification must remain serial even if implementation work is parallel.
  • Use this iOS split checklist:
  • Shared files: view controller, SwiftUI view, coordinator, model, project
    file, asset catalog, localization, build settings, and generated files.
  • Dependency order: API/model changes before UI, routing before screen flows,
    project settings before build validation, fixture updates before Maestro.
  • Verification bottlenecks: one simulator, one physical device, single Xcode
    scheme, shared DerivedData, or long-running UI flows.
  • Merge risk: .pbxproj, shared snapshots, storyboard/xib, package files,
    generated screenshots, and global test fixtures.

Do not spawn subagents during this assessment unless the user has explicitly
asked for delegation or parallel agent work and approved execution.
Recommending multiple agents is only an assessment; actual subagent spawning
waits until the user approves execution.

Stage 3: Execute After Approval

When the user explicitly approves executing the recommended plan:

  • If no concrete plan has been presented in the current thread, first summarize
    or rebuild the intended plan and ask for confirmation before editing files.
  • Treat approval as sufficient only when the user clearly instructs you to begin
    implementing the current plan or a named option.
  • Do not treat status checks, feasibility questions, requests for reassurance,
    or requests for your opinion as approval. Answer them directly and continue
    planning unless the user then gives a clear execution instruction.
  • Implement according to the approved plan and the repo's local rules.
  • Use subagents only if the user explicitly asked for multi-agent/delegated work
    and the approved plan recommended it.
  • Give each subagent a concrete, bounded task with disjoint write ownership.
  • Keep urgent, tightly coupled, or integration-critical work in the main agent.
  • Run the repo's relevant verification gates and record any blocker with exact
    commands and artifacts.
  • If behavior changes and tests or flows are missing, update the appropriate
    tracker or execution plan according to repo rules.

Harness Engineering

"参考项目的 harness engineering" means:

  • Treat the repository's documented harness as the source of truth.
  • Prefer existing verification scripts over ad hoc commands.
  • Do not add fake app states, private launch routes, fake stores, or test-only
    runtime paths just to make implementation or visual review easier.
  • Prefer XcodeBuildMCP or the repo's documented xcodebuild wrapper for build,
    test, install, launch, screenshots, and simulator logs. Check session defaults
    before the first XcodeBuildMCP build/run/test call.
  • For iOS Maestro flows, prefer launchApp.permissions or setPermissions to
    preconfigure system permissions instead of making smoke flows tap permission
    alerts. Keep ATT/usertracking prompt taps optional when the local
    Maestro/Xcode/iOS Simulator stack still shows the alert after
    usertracking: allow.
  • Follow the repo's harness rules for generated verification artifacts such as
    screenshots, visual review captures, build logs, DerivedData, result bundles,
    and simulator output; keep them local, ignored, or cleaned up unless the repo
    explicitly requires preserving them.

Behavior Checks

Use these examples to keep the skill honest:

  • User intent: requests an iOS implementation plan and says not to edit yet.
    Expected: read only the relevant iOS files and harness docs, then return a
    plan with affected areas, verification commands, risks, and agent split. Make
    no edits.
  • User intent: asks whether the iOS work can be split across multiple agents.
    Expected: assess file ownership, simulator bottlenecks, .pbxproj risk, and
    UI flow verification. Do not spawn subagents unless execution is approved.
  • User intent: asks you to execute the current recommendation.
    Expected: execute only if a concrete plan exists in the current thread. If the
    plan is missing or stale, restate it and ask for confirmation before editing.

常见问题

5 问
答案由本站依据条目字段整理
plan-before-code怎么安装?

在支持 Skills 的客户端里执行:skillhub install user_104630ff/plan-before-code。安装方式为未标注。装完刷新技能列表或重开客户端。

plan-before-code支持哪些客户端?

资料没有标注宿主客户端,但只要客户端支持 Skills(Claude、Codex、Cursor 等),一般都能加载。

plan-before-code权限高吗,安全吗?

权限级别为未标注权限。安装前先看它会读取或写入哪些内容。

plan-before-code收费吗?

本站不代收费用,也没有标注具体价格。是否收费取决于技能本身和所用的模型或客户端,正式使用前按作者说明确认。

plan-before-code用什么许可证?

许可证标注为 未说明(许可证不明确)。商用或二次分发前请到仓库确认条款原文。

热门专题

按场景挑技能
全部专题 →

技能内容以作者仓库为准;分类、权限级别与许可证状态的中文说明为中文整理,最近核验 未标注。