图像测试
- 作者仓库星标 3,406
- 作者更新于 实时读取
- 作者仓库 claude-octopus
- 领域
- 工程开发
- 兼容 Agent
-
- Claude Code
- Cursor
- Cline
- Codex
- Windsurf
- Gemini CLI
- +20
- 信任分
- 88 / 100 · 社区维护
- 作者 / 版本 / 许可
- @nyldn · 未声明 license
- Token 消耗评级
- 低消耗
- 接入复杂程度
- 需简单配置
- 是否需要外部 API Key
- 不需要
- 兼容的系统
- macOS · Linux · Windows
- 底层运行要求
- 无特殊要求
- 文件与系统权限
-
- 只读
- 允许写入 / 修改
- Shell 执行
- 网络行为
- 仅限本地
- 安装命令数
- 26 条
档案由构建时根据 SKILL.md 与安装命令自动衍生,可能与作者实际意图存在差异。
需要注意: 未限定 allowed-tools,默认拥有全部工具权限。
---
name: skill-visual-feedback
description: Process screenshot-based UI/UX feedback to fix visual issues — use when users share screenshots…
category: 工程开发
runtime: 无特殊运行时
---
# skill-visual-feedback 输出预览
## PART A: 任务判断
- 适用问题:代码实现、重构、调试或代码审查。
- 输入要求:目标材料、限制条件、期望输出和验收方式。
- 证据边界:围绕“Overview / When to Use / The Process”读取原文规则,不把推断写成作者承诺。
## PART B: 执行结果
- **01** 任务判断:确认你的需求是否属于代码实现、重构、调试或代码审查,并标出输入、限制和预期结果。
- **02** 执行计划:优先按“Overview / When to Use / The Process”拆成步骤,说明每一步会读取什么、修改什么、产出什么。
- **03** 交付结果:给出可复制的命令、文件改动、检查清单或内容草稿,并说明如何继续迭代。
- **04** 风险边界:结合 读取文件、写入/修改文件、执行终端命令、主要在本地完成、通常不需要额外 API Key 给出执行前确认项。
## Running Rules
- 读取文件、写入/修改文件、执行终端命令;主要在本地完成;通常不需要额外 API Key。
- 先小样例验证,再放大到真实任务。
- 交付时同时给结果、检查口径和下一步迭代建议。 原文出现了 `/octo`、`/settings` 这类斜杠命令;如果你的 Agent 支持命令触发,优先用命令开场,再补充目标和边界。
告诉 Agent 目标文件或材料、期望结果、不可改范围、是否允许联网或执行命令。本 Skill 的权限画像是:读取文件、写入/修改文件、执行终端命令。
先用一个小任务确认它会围绕“Overview / When to Use / The Process”工作;涉及文件或命令时,先看 diff、日志、预览或测试结果。
检查最终产物是否包含明确结果、必要证据和下一步动作;如果输出泛泛而谈,就补充输入、边界和验收标准后重跑。
---
name: skill-visual-feedback
description: Process screenshot-based UI/UX feedback to fix visual issues — use when users share screenshots…
category: 工程开发
source: nyldn/claude-octopus
---
# skill-visual-feedback
## 什么时候使用
- 把工程方向的常用动作沉淀成 Agent 可调用的技能 适合处理工程开发场景下的代码实现、调试、重构、测试或代码审查,核心价值是把输入、判断、执行、验证和交付边界固定下来,避免 Agent 泛泛回答。 把任务拆成可执行、可检查、可继续迭代…
- 面向代码实现、重构、调试或代码审查,优先处理能明确输入、步骤和验收标准的工作。
## 需要提供什么
- 目标材料、目录范围、期望结果和不可改动内容。
- 是否允许联网、执行命令、读写文件或调用外部服务。
## 执行规则
- 围绕「Overview / When to Use / The Process」组织步骤,不把推断写成作者事实。
- 读取文件、写入/修改文件、执行终端命令;主要在本地完成;通常不需要额外 API Key。
- 先跑小样例,确认结果可检查后再扩大任务范围。
## 输出要求
- 给出最终产物、关键证据、验证方式和下一步动作。
- 信息不足时标记 unknown,不编造命令、平台或依赖。 作者原文负责流程事实;仓库文件负责来源和命令;流狐只补充适用场景、限制和质量判断。
skill "skill-visual-feedback" {
输入层 -> 用户目标 + 目标文件 + 禁止范围 + 验收标准
上下文层 -> Overview / When to Use / The Process
规则层 -> SKILL.md 触发条件 / 执行顺序 / 输出格式
运行层 -> 无特殊运行时 | 读取文件、写入/修改文件、执行终端命令 | 主要在本地完成
安全层 -> 通常不需要额外 API Key + 小任务验证 + diff / 日志复核
输出层 -> 可复制结果 + 检查清单 + 下一步迭代
} Host: Codex CLI — This skill was designed for Claude Code and adapted for Codex. Cross-reference commands use installed skill names in Codex rather than
/octo:*slash commands. Use the active Codex shell and subagent tools. Do not claim a provider, model, or host subagent is available until the current session exposes it. For host tool equivalents, seeskills/blocks/codex-host-adapter.md.
Visual Feedback Processing
Overview
Systematic approach to processing image-based UI/UX feedback, identifying visual issues, and implementing fixes.
Core principle: Analyze image → Identify issues → Locate code → Fix systematically → Verify visually.
When to Use
Use this skill when user provides:
- Screenshots with UI/UX problems
- "[Image]" prefix with description of visual issues
- Complaints about "messy UI" or "hot mess UX"
- Button styling or layout issues with visual examples
- "This should look like X but shows as Y" with images
Do NOT use for:
- Pure code issues without visual context
- Feature requests without UI mockups
- Performance or functional bugs
- Backend issues
The Process
Phase 1: Visual Analysis
When user provides image feedback:
Step 1: Acknowledge and Examine
I can see the screenshot showing [describe what you observe].
Let me analyze the visual issues:
**Observed Problems:**
1. [Issue 1: e.g., Button styles inconsistent]
2. [Issue 2: e.g., Layout misaligned]
3. [Issue 3: e.g., Colors don't match design system]
**Expected Behavior (from description):**
- [What user said it should be]
**Actual Behavior (from image):**
- [What the image shows]
Step 2: Categorize Issues
| Issue Type | Examples |
|---|---|
| Styling | Colors, fonts, spacing, borders |
| Layout | Alignment, positioning, responsive behavior |
| Component | Wrong component used, missing component |
| State | Hover states, active states, disabled states |
| Consistency | Inconsistent patterns across UI |
**Issue Categories:**
- Styling: [list specific styling issues]
- Layout: [list layout issues]
- Component: [list component issues]
- State: [list state-related issues]
- Consistency: [list inconsistency issues]
Phase 2: Code Investigation
Step 1: Locate Relevant Components
# Search for component files related to the issue
# Example: For settings page issues
Use Glob to find component files:
**/*settings*.{tsx,jsx,ts,js,vue,svelte}
**/*button*.{tsx,jsx,ts,js,vue,svelte}
Use Grep to find specific elements:
# Search for className patterns
pattern: "className.*button|btn-"
# Search for style definitions
pattern: "style={{|styled\.|makeStyles"
Step 2: Identify Styling System
**Styling Approach Detected:**
- [ ] CSS Modules
- [ ] Styled Components
- [ ] Tailwind CSS
- [ ] Emotion/styled
- [ ] Plain CSS
- [ ] CSS-in-JS (other)
**Design System:**
- [ ] Custom design system
- [ ] Material-UI
- [ ] Ant Design
- [ ] Chakra UI
- [ ] Other: [name]
Step 3: Read Affected Files
Read the component files and associated styles to understand current implementation.
Phase 3: Root Cause Analysis
Step 1: Identify Why Issue Exists
Common root causes:
| Root Cause | Indicators |
|---|---|
| Inconsistent styling | Multiple ways to style same element |
| Missing design tokens | Hard-coded colors/spacing |
| Wrong component variant | Using primary when should use secondary |
| State not handled | Missing hover/active/disabled styles |
| Responsive issues | Fixed widths, missing breakpoints |
| Override conflicts | Specificity wars, !important overuse |
| Deprecated patterns | Old styling approach still in use |
**Root Cause Analysis:**
Issue: [specific visual problem]
Root Cause: [why it's happening]
Evidence: [code snippet or pattern showing the cause]
Impact:
- Affects: [which pages/components]
- Frequency: [how often users see this]
- Scope: [single instance or systemic]
Step 2: Scope the Fix
**Fix Scope:**
Option 1: **Targeted Fix** (fix just this instance)
- Files to modify: [list]
- Risk: Low
- Coverage: Fixes reported issue only
Option 2: **Systematic Fix** (fix pattern everywhere)
- Files to modify: [list]
- Risk: Medium
- Coverage: Fixes all instances of this pattern
Option 3: **Design System Fix** (update base component)
- Files to modify: [design system files]
- Risk: Higher (affects many components)
- Coverage: Fixes root cause system-wide
**Recommendation:** [which option and why]
Use AskUserQuestion to get user preference on scope.
Phase 4: Implementation
Step 1: Create Fix Plan
For each identified issue:
**Fix Plan:**
Issue: [description]
File: [file path]
Change: [what to change]
Before: [code snippet or description]
After: [code snippet or description]
Step 2: Implement Fixes
Apply fixes one at a time, using Edit tool:
Fixing [Issue 1]...
- File: [path]
- Change: [description]
✓ Fixed
Fixing [Issue 2]...
- File: [path]
- Change: [description]
✓ Fixed
Step 3: Ensure Consistency
If "everywhere" or "all instances" is mentioned:
# Search for all instances of the pattern
# Example: Find all primary buttons
Use Grep to find all instances, then fix each one:
**Pattern Search:** "button.*primary"
Found in:
1. src/components/Header.tsx:45
2. src/pages/Settings.tsx:123
3. src/pages/Dashboard.tsx:67
Fixing all instances...
Fix each file systematically.
Phase 5: Verification
Step 1: Visual Verification Checklist
**Verification Checklist:**
Visual Issues:
- [ ] Button styles consistent
- [ ] Layout aligned properly
- [ ] Colors match design system
- [ ] Spacing is uniform
- [ ] Typography consistent
Responsive:
- [ ] Works on mobile
- [ ] Works on tablet
- [ ] Works on desktop
States:
- [ ] Default state correct
- [ ] Hover state correct
- [ ] Active state correct
- [ ] Disabled state correct
- [ ] Focus state accessible
**How to verify:**
1. Run dev server: `npm run dev`
2. Navigate to [affected page]
3. Check all items above
4. Compare with original screenshot
Step 2: Request User Confirmation
✅ **Fixes Applied**
Changes made:
1. [Change 1]
2. [Change 2]
3. [Change 3]
**Please verify:**
- Open [URL or page]
- Check that [specific issue] is now resolved
- Verify no new issues introduced
Let me know if the visual issues are resolved or if further adjustments are needed.
Common Patterns
Pattern 1: Button Style Consistency
User: "[Image] these button styles need to be fixed everywhere"
Process:
1. Analyze image - identify button style issues
2. Search for all button components
3. Identify design system button component
4. Update base button component OR
5. Update all instances to use correct variant
6. Verify consistency across app
Pattern 2: Layout Misalignment
User: "[Image] When logo position is set to Top right, it shows as Middle right"
Process:
1. Analyze image - see position mismatch
2. Find logo positioning code
3. Identify why "Top right" maps to "Middle right"
4. Fix the mapping or positioning logic
5. Test all position options
6. Verify with user
Pattern 3: Settings UI Issues
User: "[Image] The /settings should be dropdowns not text inputs"
Process:
1. Analyze image - see text inputs instead of dropdowns
2. Navigate to settings component code
3. Identify field definitions
4. Replace input components with select/dropdown
5. Ensure options are populated correctly
6. Verify all settings fields
Pattern 4: General "Hot Mess" Feedback
User: "why is the Display Ad Creator UX still a hot mess?"
Process:
1. Ask for specific issues or screenshot
2. If provided, analyze systematically
3. Create prioritized list of issues
4. Fix highest-impact issues first
5. Verify improvements with user
Integration with Other Skills
With skill-debug
Visual issue that doesn't make sense?
→ Use skill-debug to investigate why visual state is incorrect
With skill-audit
User says "fix these everywhere"?
→ Use skill-audit to find all instances
→ Use skill-visual-feedback to fix each systematically
With flow-tangle
Visual feedback requires new component?
→ Use flow-tangle to implement the component
→ Use skill-visual-feedback to verify it matches design
Best Practices
1. Always Acknowledge the Visual Evidence
Good:
I can see in the screenshot that the button has inconsistent padding and the wrong color scheme compared to other primary buttons in the interface.
Poor:
I'll fix the button.
2. Be Specific About Changes
Good:
Changing:
- Button background: #3498db → #2563eb (primary-600)
- Padding: 8px 12px → 12px 16px
- Border radius: 4px → 6px
Poor:
Updating button styles.
3. Consider Mobile/Responsive
Always check if the fix works across breakpoints:
**Responsive Verification:**
- Mobile (< 768px): [status]
- Tablet (768px - 1024px): [status]
- Desktop (> 1024px): [status]
Red Flags - Don't Do This
| Action | Why It's Wrong |
|---|---|
| Fix without analyzing the image | Might fix wrong thing |
| Change only one instance when user says "everywhere" | Incomplete fix |
| Use !important to force styles | Creates specificity problems |
| Hard-code colors instead of using design tokens | Inconsistent with system |
| Skip verification | User has to report same issue again |
| Make assumptions without asking | Might not match user's vision |
Quick Reference
| User Feedback Pattern | Action Required |
|---|---|
| "[Image] X should be Y" | Analyze image → Find code → Fix → Verify |
| "Button styles everywhere" | Find all instances → Fix systematically |
| "UI is a mess" | Request specifics → Prioritize → Fix incrementally |
| "When X, shows Y instead of Z" | Debug state/logic → Fix mapping → Test all cases |
The Bottom Line
Visual feedback → Image analysis + Systematic fix + Visual verification
Otherwise → Guessing at fixes + Incomplete coverage
See the issue. Understand the root cause. Fix it everywhere. Verify visually.
先判断是否适合
作者设计意图
作者的方法与取舍
边界和复核