clean-code-review-1-0-0

SKILL开发
开发 未标注权限 许可证不明确
安装这个技能

Pragmatic coding standards for writing clean, maintainable code — naming, functions, structure, anti-patterns, and pre-edit safety checks. Use when writing new code, refactoring existing code, reviewing code quality, or establishing coding standards.

一句话选型结论

按资料字段整理

clean-code-review-1-0-0是开发类的 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。

分类开发 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_15292d5a/yjkj-clean-code-review-1-0-0
  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

开发
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_15292d5a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 1791684185
正文体量9.9 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
写代码与改 bug

按需求补代码、定位并修掉报错。

读仓库与生成改动

让模型读懂项目结构,再给出可落地的改动。

跑测试与排查故障

按现象排查问题,补测试用例并复跑。

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

  • 需要在开发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
clean-code-review-1-0-0当前 未标注权限 未标注 未标注 未标注 有
技能审查员 浏览器控制 ClawHub 市场 877.9 万 OpenClaw 有
Vercel React 最佳实践 浏览器控制 GitHub 仓库 849.1 万 Codex、Claude、Cursor 有
GitHub 代码协作 联网访问 ClawHub 市场 763.3 万 OpenClaw 有
网页设计指南 联网访问 GitHub 仓库 668.6 万 Codex、Claude、Cursor 有
本体论 只读 ClawHub 市场 663.7 万 OpenClaw 有

SKILL.md 全文

9.9 KB
模型实际读到的说明书原文,来自技能仓库

Clean Code

> Be concise, direct, and solution-focused. Clean code reads like well-written prose — every name reveals intent, every function does one thing, and every abstraction earns its place.

Installation

OpenClaw / Moltbot / Clawbot

npx clawhub@latest install clean-code

Core Principles

Principle Rule Practical Test
SRP Single Responsibility — each function/class does ONE thing "Can I describe what this does without using 'and'?"
DRY Don't Repeat Yourself — extract duplicates, reuse "Have I written this logic before?"
KISS Keep It Simple — simplest solution that works "Is there a simpler way to achieve this?"
YAGNI You Aren't Gonna Need It — don't build unused features "Does anyone need this right now?"
Boy Scout Leave code cleaner than you found it "Is this file better after my change?"

Naming Rules

Names are the most important documentation. A good name eliminates the need for a comment.

Element Convention Bad Good
Variables Reveal intent n, d, tmp userCount, elapsed, activeUsers
Functions Verb + noun user(), calc() getUserById(), calculateTotal()
Booleans Question form active, flag isActive, hasPermission, canEdit
Constants SCREAMING_SNAKE max, timeout MAX_RETRY_COUNT, REQUEST_TIMEOUT_MS
Classes Noun, singular Manager, Data UserRepository, OrderService
Enums PascalCase values 'pending' string Status.Pending

> Rule: If you need a comment to explain a name, rename it.

Naming Anti-Patterns

Anti-Pattern Problem Fix
Cryptic abbreviations (usrMgr, cfg) Unreadable in 6 months Spell it out — IDE autocomplete makes long names free
Generic names (data, info, item, handler) Says nothing about purpose Use domain-specific names that reveal intent
Misleading names (getUserList returns one user) Actively deceives readers Match name to behavior, or change the behavior
Hungarian notation (strName, nCount, IUser) Redundant with type system Let TypeScript/IDE show types; names describe purpose

Function Rules

Rule Guideline Why
Small Max 20 lines, ideally 5-10 Fits in your head
One Thing Does one thing, does it well Testable and nameable
One Level One level of abstraction per function Readable top to bottom
Few Args Max 3 arguments, prefer 0-2 Easy to call correctly
No Side Effects Don't mutate inputs unexpectedly Predictable behavior

Guard Clauses

Flatten nested conditionals with early returns. Never nest deeper than 2 levels.

// BAD — 5 levels deep
function processOrder(order: Order) {
  if (order) {
    if (order.items.length > 0) {
      if (order.customer) {
        if (order.customer.isVerified) {
          return submitOrder(order);
        }
      }
    }
  }
  throw new Error('Invalid order');
}

// GOOD — guard clauses flatten the structure
function processOrder(order: Order) {
  if (!order) throw new Error('No order');
  if (!order.items.length) throw new Error('No items');
  if (!order.customer) throw new Error('No customer');
  if (!order.customer.isVerified) throw new Error('Customer not verified');

  return submitOrder(order);
}

Parameter Objects

When a function needs more than 3 arguments, use an options object.

// BAD — too many parameters, order matters
createUser('John', 'Doe', 'john@example.com', 'secret', 'admin', 'Engineering');

// GOOD — self-documenting options object
createUser({
  firstName: 'John',
  lastName: 'Doe',
  email: 'john@example.com',
  password: 'secret',
  role: 'admin',
  department: 'Engineering',
});

Code Structure Patterns

Pattern When to Apply Benefit
Guard Clauses Edge cases at function start Flat, readable flow
Flat > Nested Any nesting beyond 2 levels Reduced cognitive load
Composition Complex operations Small, testable pieces
Colocation Related code across files Easier to find and change
Extract Function Comments separating "sections" Self-documenting code

Composition Over God Functions

// BAD — god function doing everything
async function processOrder(order: Order) {
  // Validate... (15 lines)
  // Calculate totals... (15 lines)
  // Process payment... (10 lines)
  // Send notifications... (10 lines)
  // Update inventory... (10 lines)
  return { success: true };
}

// GOOD — composed of small, focused functions
async function processOrder(order: Order) {
  validateOrder(order);
  const totals = calculateOrderTotals(order);
  const payment = await processPayment(order.customer, totals);
  await sendOrderConfirmation(order, payment);
  await updateInventory(order.items);
  return { success: true, orderId: payment.orderId };
}

Return Type Consistency

Functions should return consistent types. Use discriminated unions for multiple outcomes.

// BAD — returns different types
function getUser(id: string) {
  const user = database.find(id);
  if (!user) return false;     // boolean
  if (user.isDeleted) return null; // null
  return user;                 // User
}

// GOOD — discriminated union
type GetUserResult =
  | { status: 'found'; user: User }
  | { status: 'not_found' }
  | { status: 'deleted' };

function getUser(id: string): GetUserResult {
  const user = database.find(id);
  if (!user) return { status: 'not_found' };
  if (user.isDeleted) return { status: 'deleted' };
  return { status: 'found', user };
}

Anti-Patterns

Anti-Pattern Problem Fix
Comment every line Noise obscures signal Delete obvious comments; comment why, not what
Helper for one-liner Unnecessary indirection Inline the code
Factory for 2 objects Over-engineering Direct instantiation
utils.ts with 1 function Junk drawer file Put code where it's used
Deep nesting Unreadable flow Guard clauses and early returns
Magic numbers Unclear intent Named constants
God functions Untestable, unreadable Split by responsibility
Commented-out code Dead code confusion Delete it; git remembers
TODO sprawl Never gets done Track in issue tracker, not code
Premature abstraction Wrong abstraction is worse than none Wait for 3+ duplicates before abstracting
Copy-paste programming Duplicated bugs Extract shared logic
Exception-driven control flow Slow and confusing Use explicit conditionals
Stringly-typed code Typos and missed cases Use enums or union types
Callback hell Pyramid of doom Use async/await

Pre-Edit Safety Check

Before changing any file, answer these questions to avoid cascading breakage:

Question Why
What imports this file? Dependents might break on interface changes
What does this file import? You might need to update the contract
What tests cover this? Tests might fail — update them alongside code
Is this a shared component? Multiple consumers means wider blast radius
File to edit: UserService.ts
├── Who imports this? → UserController.ts, AuthController.ts
├── Do they need changes too? → Check function signatures
└── What tests cover this? → UserService.test.ts

> Rule: Edit the file + all dependent files in the SAME task. Never leave broken imports or missing updates.


Self-Check Before Completing

Before marking any task complete, verify:

Check Question
Goal met? Did I do exactly what was asked?
Files edited? Did I modify all necessary files, including dependents?
Code works? Did I verify the change compiles and runs?
No errors? Do lint and type checks pass?
Nothing forgotten? Any edge cases or dependent files missed?

NEVER Do

  1. NEVER add comments that restate the code — if the code needs a comment to explain what it does, rename things until it doesn't
  2. NEVER create abstractions for fewer than 3 use cases — premature abstraction is worse than duplication
  3. NEVER leave commented-out code in the codebase — delete it; version control exists for history
  4. NEVER write functions longer than 20 lines — extract sub-functions until each does one thing
  5. NEVER nest deeper than 2 levels — use guard clauses, early returns, or extract functions
  6. NEVER use magic numbers or strings — define named constants with clear semantics
  7. NEVER edit a file without checking what depends on it — broken imports and missing updates are the most common source of bugs in multi-file changes
  8. NEVER leave a task with failing lint or type checks — fix all errors before marking complete

References

Detailed guides for specific clean code topics:

Reference Description
Anti-Patterns 21 common mistakes with bad/good code examples across naming, functions, structure, and comments
Code Smells Classic code smells catalog with detection patterns — Bloaters, OO Abusers, Change Preventers, Dispensables, Couplers
Refactoring Catalog Essential refactoring patterns with before/after examples and step-by-step mechanics

常见问题

5 问
答案由本站依据条目字段整理
clean-code-review-1-0-0怎么安装?

在支持 Skills 的客户端里执行:skillhub install user_15292d5a/yjkj-clean-code-review-1-0-0。安装方式为未标注。装完刷新技能列表或重开客户端。

clean-code-review-1-0-0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。

clean-code-review-1-0-0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。

clean-code-review-1-0-0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。

clean-code-review-1-0-0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。