本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

agent-sort

Build an evidence-backed ECC install plan for a specific repo by sorting skills, commands, rules, hooks, and extras into DAILY vs LIBRARY buckets using parallel repo-aware review passes. Use when ECC should be trimmed to what a project actually needs instead of loading the full bundle.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md5.8 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Agent Sort

Use this skill when a repo needs a project-specific ECC surface instead of the default full install.

The goal is not to guess what "feels useful." The goal is to classify ECC components with evidence from the actual codebase.

When to Use

  • A project only needs a subset of ECC and full installs are too noisy
  • The repo stack is clear, but nobody wants to hand-curate skills one by one
  • A team wants a repeatable install decision backed by grep evidence instead of opinion
  • You need to separate always-loaded daily workflow surfaces from searchable library/reference surfaces
  • A repo has drifted into the wrong language, rule, or hook set and needs cleanup

Non-Negotiable Rules

  • Use the current repository as the source of truth, not generic preferences
  • Every DAILY decision must cite concrete repo evidence
  • LIBRARY does not mean "delete"; it means "keep accessible without loading by default"
  • Do not install hooks, rules, or scripts that the current repo cannot use
  • Prefer ECC-native surfaces; do not introduce a second install system

Outputs

Produce these artifacts in order:

  1. DAILY inventory
  2. LIBRARY inventory
  3. install plan
  4. verification report
  5. optional skill-library router if the project wants one

Classification Model

Use two buckets only:

  • DAILY
    • should load every session for this repo
    • strongly matched to the repo's language, framework, workflow, or operator surface
  • LIBRARY
    • useful to retain, but not worth loading by default
    • should remain reachable through search, router skill, or selective manual use

Evidence Sources

Use repo-local evidence before making any classification:

  • file extensions
  • package managers and lockfiles
  • framework configs
  • CI and hook configs
  • build/test scripts
  • imports and dependency manifests
  • repo docs that explicitly describe the stack

Useful commands include:

rg --files
rg -n "typescript|react|next|supabase|django|spring|flutter|swift"
cat package.json
cat pyproject.toml
cat Cargo.toml
cat pubspec.yaml
cat go.mod

Parallel Review Passes

If parallel subagents are available, split the review into these passes:

  1. Agents
    • classify agents/*
  2. Skills
    • classify skills/*
  3. Commands
    • classify commands/*
  4. Rules
    • classify rules/*
  5. Hooks and scripts
    • classify hook surfaces, MCP health checks, helper scripts, and OS compatibility
  6. Extras
    • classify contexts, examples, MCP configs, templates, and guidance docs

If subagents are not available, run the same passes sequentially.

Core Workflow

1. Read the repo

Establish the real stack before classifying anything:

  • languages in use
  • frameworks in use
  • primary package manager
  • test stack
  • lint/format stack
  • deployment/runtime surface
  • operator integrations already present

2. Build the evidence table

For every candidate surface, record:

  • component path
  • component type
  • proposed bucket
  • repo evidence
  • short justification

Use this format:

skills/frontend-patterns | skill | DAILY | 84 .tsx files, next.config.ts present | core frontend stack
skills/django-patterns   | skill | LIBRARY | no .py files, no pyproject.toml       | not active in this repo
rules/typescript/*       | rules | DAILY | package.json + tsconfig.json            | active TS repo
rules/python/*           | rules | LIBRARY | zero Python source files             | keep accessible only

3. Decide DAILY vs LIBRARY

Promote to DAILY when:

  • the repo clearly uses the matching stack
  • the component is general enough to help every session
  • the repo already depends on the corresponding runtime or workflow

Demote to LIBRARY when:

  • the component is off-stack
  • the repo might need it later, but not every day
  • it adds context overhead without immediate relevance

4. Build the install plan

Translate the classification into action:

  • DAILY skills -> install or keep in .claude/skills/
  • DAILY commands -> keep as explicit shims only if still useful
  • DAILY rules -> install only matching language sets
  • DAILY hooks/scripts -> keep only compatible ones
  • LIBRARY surfaces -> keep accessible through search or skill-library

If the repo already uses selective installs, update that plan instead of creating another system.

5. Create the optional library router

If the project wants a searchable library surface, create:

  • .claude/skills/skill-library/SKILL.md

That router should contain:

  • a short explanation of DAILY vs LIBRARY
  • grouped trigger keywords
  • where the library references live

Do not duplicate every skill body inside the router.

6. Verify the result

After the plan is applied, verify:

  • every DAILY file exists where expected
  • stale language rules were not left active
  • incompatible hooks were not installed
  • the resulting install actually matches the repo stack

Return a compact report with:

  • DAILY count
  • LIBRARY count
  • removed stale surfaces
  • open questions

Handoffs

If the next step is interactive installation or repair, hand off to:

  • configure-ecc

If the next step is overlap cleanup or catalog review, hand off to:

  • skill-stocktake

If the next step is broader context trimming, hand off to:

  • strategic-compact

Output Format

Return the result in this order:

STACK
- language/framework/runtime summary

DAILY
- always-loaded items with evidence

LIBRARY
- searchable/reference items with evidence

INSTALL PLAN
- what should be installed, removed, or routed

VERIFICATION
- checks run and remaining gaps

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Design, implement, and audit inclusive digital products using WCAG 2.2 Level AA standards. Use this skill to generate semantic ARIA for Web and accessibility traits for Web and Native platforms (iOS/Android).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

tensology/decisionsai172026年10月10日 更新

Whole site or product — a full web accessibility (a11y) audit against WCAG 2.2, following the WCAG-EM methodology. Defines scope, samples representative pages and flows, runs the automated tier (`accessibility-scan`) and the hands-on manual tier (`accessibility-inspect`), and produces one conformance report. Grades each finding by severity and evidence basis, and states per-criterion conformance as pass, fail, or undetermined (needs a human). Use it for 'audit my site for accessibility', 'is this product accessible', 'a11y audit', 'WCAG or Section 508 conformance report', or any multi-page assessment. Assesses; does not fix (use `accessibility-fix`) or diff (use `accessibility-diff`). For a single page use `accessibility-scan`; for hands-on keyboard and screen-reader checks use `accessibility-inspect`.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

tensology/decisionsai172026年10月10日 更新

Regression check — diff a live page's web accessibility (a11y) violations against a baseline. By default it compares your uncommitted changes (stash-based); pass `--branch [<name>]` to compare against a branch. Reports the new WCAG violations introduced, the ones fixed, and the count of pre-existing ones. Use it for 'did my change break accessibility', 'what a11y issues did this PR add', or as a CI gate. For a full scan of one page use `accessibility-scan`; for a whole site use `accessibility-audit`.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

tensology/decisionsai172026年10月10日 更新

Remediation only — repair web accessibility (a11y) violations against WCAG 2.2 with a baseline, edit, and verify loop. Takes a target (URL, files, directory) or a findings worklist from `accessibility-scan`/`accessibility-inspect`/`accessibility-audit`, applies mechanical fixes as given, leaves TODOs for visual or contextual judgment, and verifies by re-running the baseline check. It only fixes. To find issues use `accessibility-scan` (one page, automated), `accessibility-inspect` (one page, manual), or `accessibility-audit` (whole site, WCAG-EM); to check for regressions use `accessibility-diff`. Use it for 'fix the a11y issues in X', 'make this accessible', 'add missing alt text and labels', 'apply these accessibility fixes', 'remediate these violations'.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

tensology/decisionsai172026年10月10日 更新

One page, hands-on manual tier — drive a live page through the web accessibility (a11y) checks a rule engine can't decide: keyboard operation and focus order, screen-reader names, roles and states from the accessibility tree, reflow and zoom, reduced motion, form errors, and target size. Grades each finding by evidence basis (verified / confirm-with-a-human / human-required) and severity, and closes every criterion in a ledger: verified, flagged, not exercised, or N/A. Locates and assesses; does not fix (use `accessibility-fix`). Use it for keyboard testing, focus-order checks, screen-reader or a11y-tree review, reflow and zoom at 200%, or 'is this operable, not just lint-clean'. The automated tier is `accessibility-scan`; `accessibility-audit` runs both across a sampled site.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

tensology/decisionsai172026年10月10日 更新

One page, automated tier — run the web accessibility (a11y) rule engine against a live page and locate every violation it can detect mechanically. Pass a URL, a config target name (e.g. `accesslint:accessibility-scan dev`), or nothing to use the default target from `accesslint.config.json`. Ensures a debuggable Chrome, runs the @accesslint/core engine over CDP, and returns a worklist of live-DOM WCAG 2.2 violations, each grounded to its DOM selector and source `file:line`. Locates; doesn't edit. Use it for 'is this page accessible', 'check a11y on this URL', 'find contrast and alt-text issues', or to verify a UI change. For hands-on keyboard and screen-reader checks use `accessibility-inspect`; for a whole site or product use `accessibility-audit`; to diff against uncommitted changes or a branch use `accessibility-diff`.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

tensology/decisionsai172026年10月10日 更新

tensology のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する