[{"data":1,"prerenderedAt":-1},["ShallowReactive",2],{"skill:01M6CFAJHKP08FB4Z3YM2D4X8B":3,"skill-same:01M6CFAJHKP08FB4Z3YM2D4X8B":101},{"skillNo":4,"name":5,"nameZh":6,"description":7,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":16,"categories":17,"keywords":18,"publishedAt":26,"linkOnly":27,"markdownContent":28,"markdownBody":29,"frontMatter":30,"refName":31,"commitSha":32,"skillDirectory":33,"forksCount":34,"repositoryHtmlUrl":35,"repositoryHomepageUrl":6,"ownerHtmlUrl":36,"ownerBlogUrl":36,"ownerDescription":37,"updatedAt":38,"install":39,"resources":52},"01M6CFAJHKP08FB4Z3YM2D4X8B","diagnose",null,"Use when debugging hard bugs, intermittent production incidents, customer-reported failures, crashes, broken workflows, thrown errors, unclear regressions, or cases where reproduction or fix confidence is uncertain.","HeathWang\u002Fhw-cc-plugin","HeathWang","https:\u002F\u002Favatars.githubusercontent.com\u002Fu\u002F4961711?v=4","01M6CF9BZ3A0CSSG3QQGGDPFEH","Heath Wang","01M6CF9C3HT4NPM370Z8MYZW4G",1,"MIT","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHeathWang\u002Fhw-cc-plugin\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fskills\u002Fdiagnose\u002FSKILL.md",[],[5,19,20,21,22,23,24,25],"customer","workflows","debugging","Production","broken","fix","use","2026-11-10 10:12:30",false,"---\nname: diagnose\ndescription: Use when debugging hard bugs, intermittent production incidents, customer-reported failures, crashes, broken workflows, thrown errors, unclear regressions, or cases where reproduction or fix confidence is uncertain.\n---\n\n# Diagnose\n\nA discipline for hard bugs. Do not skip phases for urgency, authority pressure, or plausible hunches. Emergency mitigations are allowed only as temporary containment and must not be presented as the fix.\n\nWhen exploring the codebase, use the project's domain glossary to get a clear mental model of the relevant modules, and check ADRs in the area you're touching.\n\n## Red Flags\n\n- \"Probably the cause is X\" without evidence\n- \"Fix today\" pressure\n- \"Can't reproduce, but patch anyway\"\n- A senior person tells you to skip diagnosis\n\nThese mean stop and build or strengthen the feedback loop.\n\n## Phase 1 — Build a feedback loop\n\n**This is the skill.** Everything else is mechanical. If you have a fast, deterministic, agent-runnable pass\u002Ffail signal for the bug, you will find the cause — bisection, hypothesis-testing, and instrumentation all just consume that signal. If you don't have one, no amount of staring at code will save you.\n\nSpend disproportionate effort here. **Be aggressive. Be creative. Refuse to give up.**\n\n### Ways to construct one — try them in roughly this order\n\n1. **Failing test** at whatever seam reaches the bug — unit, integration, e2e.\n2. **Curl \u002F HTTP script** against a running dev server.\n3. **CLI invocation** with a fixture input, diffing stdout against a known-good snapshot.\n4. **Headless browser script** (Playwright \u002F Puppeteer) — drives the UI, asserts on DOM\u002Fconsole\u002Fnetwork.\n5. **Replay a captured trace.** Save a real network request \u002F payload \u002F event log to disk; replay it through the code path in isolation.\n6. **Throwaway harness.** Spin up a minimal subset of the system (one service, mocked deps) that exercises the bug code path with a single function call.\n7. **Property \u002F fuzz loop.** If the bug is \"sometimes wrong output\", run 1000 random inputs and look for the failure mode.\n8. **Bisection harness.** If the bug appeared between two known states (commit, dataset, version), automate \"boot at state X, check, repeat\" so you can `git bisect run` it.\n9. **Differential loop.** Run the same input through old-version vs new-version (or two configs) and diff outputs.\n10. **HITL bash script.** Last resort. If a human must click, drive _them_ with `scripts\u002Fhitl-loop.template.sh` so the loop is still structured. Captured output feeds back to you.\n\nBuild the right feedback loop, and the bug is 90% fixed.\n\n### Iterate on the loop itself\n\nTreat the loop as a product. Once you have _a_ loop, ask:\n\n- Can I make it faster? (Cache setup, skip unrelated init, narrow the test scope.)\n- Can I make the signal sharper? (Assert on the specific symptom, not \"didn't crash\".)\n- Can I make it more deterministic? (Pin time, seed RNG, isolate filesystem, freeze network.)\n\nA 30-second flaky loop is barely better than no loop. A 2-second deterministic loop is a debugging superpower.\n\n### Non-deterministic bugs\n\nThe goal is not a clean repro but a **higher reproduction rate**. Loop the trigger 100×, parallelise, add stress, narrow timing windows, inject sleeps. A 50%-flake bug is debuggable; 1% is not — keep raising the rate until it's debuggable.\n\n### When you genuinely cannot build a loop\n\nStop and say so explicitly. List what you tried. Ask the user for: (a) access to whatever environment reproduces it, (b) a captured artifact (HAR file, log dump, core dump, screen recording with timestamps), or (c) permission to add temporary production instrumentation. Do **not** proceed to hypothesise without a loop.\n\nDo not proceed to Phase 2 until you have a loop you believe in.\n\n## Phase 2 — Reproduce\n\nRun the loop. Watch the bug appear.\n\nConfirm:\n\n- [ ] The loop produces the failure mode the **user** described — not a different failure that happens to be nearby. Wrong bug = wrong fix.\n- [ ] The failure is reproducible across multiple runs (or, for non-deterministic bugs, reproducible at a high enough rate to debug against).\n- [ ] You have captured the exact symptom (error message, wrong output, slow timing) so later phases can verify the fix actually addresses it.\n\nDo not proceed until you reproduce the bug.\n\n## Phase 3 — Hypothesise\n\nGenerate **3–5 ranked hypotheses** before testing any of them. Single-hypothesis generation anchors on the first plausible idea.\n\nEach hypothesis must be **falsifiable**: state the prediction it makes.\n\n> Format: \"If \u003CX> is the cause, then \u003Cchanging Y> will make the bug disappear \u002F \u003Cchanging Z> will make it worse.\"\n\nIf you cannot state the prediction, the hypothesis is a vibe — discard or sharpen it.\n\n**Show the ranked list to the user before testing.** They often have domain knowledge that re-ranks instantly (\"we just deployed a change to #3\"), or know hypotheses they've already ruled out. Cheap checkpoint, big time saver. Don't block on it — proceed with your ranking if the user is AFK.\n\n## Phase 4 — Instrument\n\nEach probe must map to a specific prediction from Phase 3. **Change one variable at a time.**\n\nTool preference:\n\n1. **Debugger \u002F REPL inspection** if the env supports it. One breakpoint beats ten logs.\n2. **Targeted logs** at the boundaries that distinguish hypotheses.\n3. Never \"log everything and grep\".\n\n**Tag every debug log** with a unique prefix, e.g. `[DEBUG-a4f2]`. Cleanup at the end becomes a single grep. Untagged logs survive; tagged logs die.\n\n**Perf branch.** For performance regressions, logs are usually wrong. Instead: establish a baseline measurement (timing harness, `performance.now()`, profiler, query plan), then bisect. Measure first, fix second.\n\n## Phase 5 — Fix + regression test\n\nWrite the regression test **before the fix** — but only if there is a **correct seam** for it.\n\nA correct seam is one where the test exercises the **real bug pattern** as it occurs at the call site. If the only available seam is too shallow (single-caller test when the bug needs multiple callers, unit test that can't replicate the chain that triggered the bug), a regression test there gives false confidence.\n\n**If no correct seam exists, that itself is the finding.** Note it. The codebase architecture is preventing the bug from being locked down. Flag this for the next phase.\n\nIf a correct seam exists:\n\n1. Turn the minimised repro into a failing test at that seam.\n2. Watch it fail.\n3. Apply the fix.\n4. Watch it pass.\n5. Re-run the Phase 1 feedback loop against the original (un-minimised) scenario.\n\n## Phase 6 — Cleanup + post-mortem\n\nRequired before declaring done:\n\n- [ ] Original repro no longer reproduces (re-run the Phase 1 loop)\n- [ ] Regression test passes (or absence of seam is documented)\n- [ ] All `[DEBUG-...]` instrumentation removed (`grep` the prefix)\n- [ ] Throwaway prototypes deleted (or moved to a clearly-marked debug location)\n- [ ] The hypothesis that turned out correct is stated in the commit \u002F PR message — so the next debugger learns\n\n**Then ask: what would have prevented this bug?** If the answer involves architectural change (no good test seam, tangled callers, hidden coupling) hand off to the `\u002Fimprove-codebase-architecture` skill with the specifics. Make the recommendation **after** the fix is in, not before — you have more information now than when you started.\n","# Diagnose\n\nA discipline for hard bugs. Do not skip phases for urgency, authority pressure, or plausible hunches. Emergency mitigations are allowed only as temporary containment and must not be presented as the fix.\n\nWhen exploring the codebase, use the project's domain glossary to get a clear mental model of the relevant modules, and check ADRs in the area you're touching.\n\n## Red Flags\n\n- \"Probably the cause is X\" without evidence\n- \"Fix today\" pressure\n- \"Can't reproduce, but patch anyway\"\n- A senior person tells you to skip diagnosis\n\nThese mean stop and build or strengthen the feedback loop.\n\n## Phase 1 — Build a feedback loop\n\n**This is the skill.** Everything else is mechanical. If you have a fast, deterministic, agent-runnable pass\u002Ffail signal for the bug, you will find the cause — bisection, hypothesis-testing, and instrumentation all just consume that signal. If you don't have one, no amount of staring at code will save you.\n\nSpend disproportionate effort here. **Be aggressive. Be creative. Refuse to give up.**\n\n### Ways to construct one — try them in roughly this order\n\n1. **Failing test** at whatever seam reaches the bug — unit, integration, e2e.\n2. **Curl \u002F HTTP script** against a running dev server.\n3. **CLI invocation** with a fixture input, diffing stdout against a known-good snapshot.\n4. **Headless browser script** (Playwright \u002F Puppeteer) — drives the UI, asserts on DOM\u002Fconsole\u002Fnetwork.\n5. **Replay a captured trace.** Save a real network request \u002F payload \u002F event log to disk; replay it through the code path in isolation.\n6. **Throwaway harness.** Spin up a minimal subset of the system (one service, mocked deps) that exercises the bug code path with a single function call.\n7. **Property \u002F fuzz loop.** If the bug is \"sometimes wrong output\", run 1000 random inputs and look for the failure mode.\n8. **Bisection harness.** If the bug appeared between two known states (commit, dataset, version), automate \"boot at state X, check, repeat\" so you can `git bisect run` it.\n9. **Differential loop.** Run the same input through old-version vs new-version (or two configs) and diff outputs.\n10. **HITL bash script.** Last resort. If a human must click, drive _them_ with `scripts\u002Fhitl-loop.template.sh` so the loop is still structured. Captured output feeds back to you.\n\nBuild the right feedback loop, and the bug is 90% fixed.\n\n### Iterate on the loop itself\n\nTreat the loop as a product. Once you have _a_ loop, ask:\n\n- Can I make it faster? (Cache setup, skip unrelated init, narrow the test scope.)\n- Can I make the signal sharper? (Assert on the specific symptom, not \"didn't crash\".)\n- Can I make it more deterministic? (Pin time, seed RNG, isolate filesystem, freeze network.)\n\nA 30-second flaky loop is barely better than no loop. A 2-second deterministic loop is a debugging superpower.\n\n### Non-deterministic bugs\n\nThe goal is not a clean repro but a **higher reproduction rate**. Loop the trigger 100×, parallelise, add stress, narrow timing windows, inject sleeps. A 50%-flake bug is debuggable; 1% is not — keep raising the rate until it's debuggable.\n\n### When you genuinely cannot build a loop\n\nStop and say so explicitly. List what you tried. Ask the user for: (a) access to whatever environment reproduces it, (b) a captured artifact (HAR file, log dump, core dump, screen recording with timestamps), or (c) permission to add temporary production instrumentation. Do **not** proceed to hypothesise without a loop.\n\nDo not proceed to Phase 2 until you have a loop you believe in.\n\n## Phase 2 — Reproduce\n\nRun the loop. Watch the bug appear.\n\nConfirm:\n\n- [ ] The loop produces the failure mode the **user** described — not a different failure that happens to be nearby. Wrong bug = wrong fix.\n- [ ] The failure is reproducible across multiple runs (or, for non-deterministic bugs, reproducible at a high enough rate to debug against).\n- [ ] You have captured the exact symptom (error message, wrong output, slow timing) so later phases can verify the fix actually addresses it.\n\nDo not proceed until you reproduce the bug.\n\n## Phase 3 — Hypothesise\n\nGenerate **3–5 ranked hypotheses** before testing any of them. Single-hypothesis generation anchors on the first plausible idea.\n\nEach hypothesis must be **falsifiable**: state the prediction it makes.\n\n> Format: \"If \u003CX> is the cause, then \u003Cchanging Y> will make the bug disappear \u002F \u003Cchanging Z> will make it worse.\"\n\nIf you cannot state the prediction, the hypothesis is a vibe — discard or sharpen it.\n\n**Show the ranked list to the user before testing.** They often have domain knowledge that re-ranks instantly (\"we just deployed a change to #3\"), or know hypotheses they've already ruled out. Cheap checkpoint, big time saver. Don't block on it — proceed with your ranking if the user is AFK.\n\n## Phase 4 — Instrument\n\nEach probe must map to a specific prediction from Phase 3. **Change one variable at a time.**\n\nTool preference:\n\n1. **Debugger \u002F REPL inspection** if the env supports it. One breakpoint beats ten logs.\n2. **Targeted logs** at the boundaries that distinguish hypotheses.\n3. Never \"log everything and grep\".\n\n**Tag every debug log** with a unique prefix, e.g. `[DEBUG-a4f2]`. Cleanup at the end becomes a single grep. Untagged logs survive; tagged logs die.\n\n**Perf branch.** For performance regressions, logs are usually wrong. Instead: establish a baseline measurement (timing harness, `performance.now()`, profiler, query plan), then bisect. Measure first, fix second.\n\n## Phase 5 — Fix + regression test\n\nWrite the regression test **before the fix** — but only if there is a **correct seam** for it.\n\nA correct seam is one where the test exercises the **real bug pattern** as it occurs at the call site. If the only available seam is too shallow (single-caller test when the bug needs multiple callers, unit test that can't replicate the chain that triggered the bug), a regression test there gives false confidence.\n\n**If no correct seam exists, that itself is the finding.** Note it. The codebase architecture is preventing the bug from being locked down. Flag this for the next phase.\n\nIf a correct seam exists:\n\n1. Turn the minimised repro into a failing test at that seam.\n2. Watch it fail.\n3. Apply the fix.\n4. Watch it pass.\n5. Re-run the Phase 1 feedback loop against the original (un-minimised) scenario.\n\n## Phase 6 — Cleanup + post-mortem\n\nRequired before declaring done:\n\n- [ ] Original repro no longer reproduces (re-run the Phase 1 loop)\n- [ ] Regression test passes (or absence of seam is documented)\n- [ ] All `[DEBUG-...]` instrumentation removed (`grep` the prefix)\n- [ ] Throwaway prototypes deleted (or moved to a clearly-marked debug location)\n- [ ] The hypothesis that turned out correct is stated in the commit \u002F PR message — so the next debugger learns\n\n**Then ask: what would have prevented this bug?** If the answer involves architectural change (no good test seam, tangled callers, hidden coupling) hand off to the `\u002Fimprove-codebase-architecture` skill with the specifics. Make the recommendation **after** the fix is in, not before — you have more information now than when you started.\n",{"name":5,"description":7},"master","a12b4ddfc807225744ed4ddecc493e87048dca69","skills\u002Fdiagnose",0,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHeathWang\u002Fhw-cc-plugin","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHeathWang","iOS \u002F front end \u002F python develper","2026-11-03 17:20:23",{"source":8,"skillName":5,"commands":40,"prompt":50,"zipAvailable":51},[41,44,47],{"tool":42,"command":43},"npx","npx skills add HeathWang\u002Fhw-cc-plugin --skill diagnose",{"tool":45,"command":46},"bunx","bunx skills add HeathWang\u002Fhw-cc-plugin --skill diagnose",{"tool":48,"command":49},"pnpm","pnpm dlx skills add HeathWang\u002Fhw-cc-plugin --skill diagnose","安装技能，技能地址：https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHeathWang\u002Fhw-cc-plugin\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fskills\u002Fdiagnose\u002FSKILL.md",true,[53,59,63,67,71,75,79,83,89,93,97],{"path":54,"resourceType":55,"resourceTypeDesc":56,"sizeBytes":57,"sourceHtmlUrl":58},"_meta.json","REFERENCE","参考文档",133,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjiayaoqijia\u002Fcryptoskill\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fexchanges\u002Fokx-dex-market\u002F_meta.json",{"path":60,"resourceType":55,"resourceTypeDesc":56,"sizeBytes":61,"sourceHtmlUrl":62},"_shared\u002Fchain-support.md",686,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjiayaoqijia\u002Fcryptoskill\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fexchanges\u002Fokx-dex-market\u002F_shared\u002Fchain-support.md",{"path":64,"resourceType":55,"resourceTypeDesc":56,"sizeBytes":65,"sourceHtmlUrl":66},"_shared\u002Fpayment-notifications.md",13846,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjiayaoqijia\u002Fcryptoskill\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fexchanges\u002Fokx-dex-market\u002F_shared\u002Fpayment-notifications.md",{"path":68,"resourceType":55,"resourceTypeDesc":56,"sizeBytes":69,"sourceHtmlUrl":70},"_shared\u002Fpreflight.md",4392,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjiayaoqijia\u002Fcryptoskill\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fexchanges\u002Fokx-dex-market\u002F_shared\u002Fpreflight.md",{"path":72,"resourceType":55,"resourceTypeDesc":56,"sizeBytes":73,"sourceHtmlUrl":74},"references\u002Fcli-reference.md",11393,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjiayaoqijia\u002Fcryptoskill\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fexchanges\u002Fokx-dex-market\u002Freferences\u002Fcli-reference.md",{"path":76,"resourceType":55,"resourceTypeDesc":56,"sizeBytes":77,"sourceHtmlUrl":78},"references\u002Fkeyword-glossary.md",1203,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjiayaoqijia\u002Fcryptoskill\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fexchanges\u002Fokx-dex-market\u002Freferences\u002Fkeyword-glossary.md",{"path":80,"resourceType":55,"resourceTypeDesc":56,"sizeBytes":81,"sourceHtmlUrl":82},"references\u002Fws-protocol.md",8713,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjiayaoqijia\u002Fcryptoskill\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fexchanges\u002Fokx-dex-market\u002Freferences\u002Fws-protocol.md",{"path":84,"resourceType":85,"resourceTypeDesc":86,"sizeBytes":87,"sourceHtmlUrl":88},"scripts\u002Fhitl-loop.template.sh","SCRIPT","脚本",1164,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHeathWang\u002Fhw-cc-plugin\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fskills\u002Fdiagnose\u002Fscripts\u002Fhitl-loop.template.sh",{"path":90,"resourceType":55,"resourceTypeDesc":56,"sizeBytes":91,"sourceHtmlUrl":92},"skill-card.md",2914,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjiayaoqijia\u002Fcryptoskill\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fexchanges\u002Fokx-dex-market\u002Fskill-card.md",{"path":94,"resourceType":55,"resourceTypeDesc":56,"sizeBytes":95,"sourceHtmlUrl":96},"SOURCE.md",272,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjiayaoqijia\u002Fcryptoskill\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fexchanges\u002Fokx-dex-market\u002FSOURCE.md",{"path":98,"resourceType":55,"resourceTypeDesc":56,"sizeBytes":99,"sourceHtmlUrl":100},"TRUST.auto.yaml",2240,"https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002Fjiayaoqijia\u002Fcryptoskill\u002Fblob\u002Fmain\u002Fskills\u002Fexchanges\u002Fokx-dex-market\u002FTRUST.auto.yaml",[102,133,154,164,176,194],{"skillNo":103,"name":104,"nameZh":6,"description":105,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":106,"categories":107,"keywords":113,"publishedAt":26},"01M6CFBEFHMPFRFM9AQAJVVAR0","reconstructing-ui-from-screenshots","Use when implementing or correcting an app or web UI from a design image, screenshot, mockup, or reference PNG where accurate size, spacing, color, typography, assets, and alignment matter.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHeathWang\u002Fhw-cc-plugin\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fskills\u002Freconstructing-ui-from-screenshots\u002FSKILL.md",[108],{"categoryNo":109,"categoryName":110,"taxonomyType":111,"taxonomyTypeDesc":112},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000032","设计师","PROFESSION","适用职业",[114,115,116,117,118,119,25,120,121,122,123,124,125,126,127,128,129,130,131,132],"screenshots","ui","reconstructing ui from screenshots","mockup","alignment","design","image","web","assets","screenshot","reference","typography","png","app","color","implementing","web ui","size","spacing",{"skillNo":134,"name":135,"nameZh":6,"description":136,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":137,"categories":138,"keywords":139,"publishedAt":26},"01M6CFBBT8EXTSBHXEFGRWRZ3C","question-answer","Use when the user wants a read-only explanation of existing code behavior, architecture, control flow, data flow, dependencies, or implementation decisions and has not requested project changes.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHeathWang\u002Fhw-cc-plugin\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fskills\u002Fquestion-answer\u002FSKILL.md",[],[140,141,142,143,144,145,146,147,148,149,150,151,152,25,153],"question","question answer","flow","grep","architecture","read","data","implementation","user","behavior","webfetch","code","only","decisions",{"skillNo":155,"name":156,"nameZh":6,"description":157,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":158,"categories":159,"keywords":160,"publishedAt":26},"01M6CFB60X8Q9479W73SJCDEVJ","java-to-swift","Use when converting Java 1.8 classes to Swift 5.0+ Codable structs - handling type mapping, nullability, inheritance flattening, BaseReq exclusions, and property naming conventions.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHeathWang\u002Fhw-cc-plugin\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fskills\u002Fjava-to-swift\u002FSKILL.md",[],[161,162,163,145,143,25],"java","java to swift","swift",{"skillNo":165,"name":166,"nameZh":6,"description":167,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":168,"categories":169,"keywords":170,"publishedAt":26},"01M6CFB3DMRW02HSYWMMK3VDPM","java-to-nextjs","Use when converting Java 1.8 classes to Next.js TypeScript interface definitions - handling type mapping, nullability, inheritance, naming conventions, and BaseReq\u002FBaseResponse exclusions.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHeathWang\u002Fhw-cc-plugin\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fskills\u002Fjava-to-nextjs\u002FSKILL.md",[],[161,171,172,25,173,145,174,143,175],"java to nextjs","nextjs","Next.js","typescript","js",{"skillNo":177,"name":178,"nameZh":6,"description":179,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":180,"categories":181,"keywords":187,"publishedAt":26},"01M6CFB055EXKR72703ST6H3XW","ios-i18n-workflow","Use when iOS apps using SwiftGen L10n need localization work - adding keys, checking missing translations, or cleaning unused entries. Triggered by hardcoded strings, missing L10n references, incomplete translations across multiple languages, or unused localization cleanup requests.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHeathWang\u002Fhw-cc-plugin\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fskills\u002Fios-i18n-workflow\u002FSKILL.md",[182],{"categoryNo":183,"categoryName":184,"taxonomyType":185,"taxonomyTypeDesc":186},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000023","Skill与智能体开发","SCENARIO","使用场景",[188,189,190,25,191,192,193],"ios","workflow","ios i18n workflow","cleanup","references","work",{"skillNo":195,"name":196,"nameZh":6,"description":197,"descriptionZh":6,"repositoryFullName":8,"ownerLogin":9,"ownerAvatarUrl":10,"ownerAccountNo":11,"ownerDisplayName":12,"repositoryNo":13,"starsCount":14,"licenseSpdxId":15,"licenseFileUrl":6,"sourceHtmlUrl":198,"categories":199,"keywords":203,"publishedAt":26},"01M6CFAXJJZ59SWHZ1RAGQ461N","improve-codebase-architecture","Use when the user wants architectural deepening opportunities for a codebase or named files, shown as a visual HTML report, and when they then pick candidates from that report to implement in the code already reviewed.","https:\u002F\u002Fgithub.com\u002FHeathWang\u002Fhw-cc-plugin\u002Fblob\u002Fmaster\u002Fskills\u002Fimprove-codebase-architecture\u002FSKILL.md",[200],{"categoryNo":201,"categoryName":202,"taxonomyType":185,"taxonomyTypeDesc":186},"01JBSEEDCAT000000000000009","前端开发",[204,205,144,206,207,208,209,210,211,212,213,214,25,215,151,216,148],"codebase","improve codebase architecture","improve","report","pick","html report","html","as","for","true","files","visual","implement"]