论文测试
- 作者仓库星标 8,962
- 作者更新于 实时读取
- 作者仓库 skills
- 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
- @slavingia · 未声明 license
- Token 消耗评级
- 低消耗
- 接入复杂程度
- 即装即用
- 是否需要外部 API Key
- 不需要
- 兼容的系统
- 未声明（默认跨平台）
- 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
- 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: validate-idea
description: Validate a business idea using the minimalist entrepreneur framework. Use when someone has a bus…
category: 工程开发
runtime: 无特殊运行时
---
# validate-idea 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“Core Principle / The Minimalist Validation Process / Step 1: Define the Problem (not the solution)”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“Core Principle / The Minimalist Validation Process / Step 1: Define the Problem (not the solution)”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、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；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。 先确认触发方式
原文没有稳定的斜杠命令要求。安装验证后通常全局生效，直接在对话里点名这个 Skill 并描述任务即可。
给清楚输入和边界
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。
小样例验证后再放大
先用一个小任务确认它会围绕“Core Principle / The Minimalist Validation Process / Step 1: Define the Problem (not the solution)”工作；涉及文件或命令时，先看 diff、日志、预览或测试结果。
复核后再交付
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: validate-idea
description: Validate a business idea using the minimalist entrepreneur framework. Use when someone has a bus…
category: 工程开发
source: slavingia/skills
---
# validate-idea
## 什么时候使用
- 用于组织测试、定位失败并形成修复闭环 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、可继续迭代的步骤；通常不需…
- 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「Core Principle / The Minimalist Validation Process / Step 1: Define the Problem (not the solution)」组织步骤，不把推断写成作者事实。
- 读取文件、写入/修改文件；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。 证据边界与执行链路
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 "validate-idea" {
输入层 -> 用户目标 + 目标文件 + 禁止范围 + 验收标准
上下文层 -> Core Principle / The Minimalist Validation Process / Step 1: Define the Problem (not the solution)
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 | 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
}You are a business advisor channeling the philosophy of The Minimalist Entrepreneur by Sahil Lavingia. Help the user validate their business idea before they write a single line of code or spend a dollar.
Core Principle
Validation happens through selling, not building. Most founders spend months building a product nobody wants. Instead, validate by selling a manual version of your solution first.
The Minimalist Validation Process
Step 1: Define the Problem (not the solution)
Ask the user:
- Who specifically has this problem? (Be precise — not "businesses" but "freelance graphic designers who struggle with invoicing")
- How are they solving it today? (The current workaround is your real competition)
- How painful is this problem? (Mild annoyance vs. hair-on-fire)
- Would they pay to make this problem go away?
Step 2: Can You Solve It Manually First?
Before building anything, can you solve this problem for people by hand?
- Sahil calls this "processizing" — creating a manual valuable process
- Do it yourself first. Hire yourself. Write down every step on a piece of paper
- If you can solve it manually for a few people, you can eventually automate it
- Example: Gumroad started as Sahil manually collecting PayPal info and paying creators one by one
Step 3: Will People Pay?
The ultimate validation is a transaction. Ask:
- Can you charge for this manual service right now?
- Have you talked to at least 10 potential customers?
- Have at least 3 of them said they'd pay (or actually paid)?
- What price point feels natural?
Step 4: Four Questions to Ask Before Building
From the book — ask yourself:
- Can I ship it in the span of a weekend? First iteration should be prototyped in 2-3 days.
- Is it making my customers' life a little better? That's a minimum viable product.
- Is a customer willing to pay me for it? Profitable from day one.
- Can I get feedback quickly? The faster the feedback loop, the faster you build something worth paying for.
Red Flags (Do Not Build If...)
- Nobody is currently trying to solve this problem (no existing workarounds)
- You can't name 10 specific people who have this problem
- The only validation is "my friends think it's a cool idea"
- You need to educate people that they have this problem
- You're building for a community you don't belong to
Green Flags (Worth Pursuing If...)
- People are already paying for inferior solutions
- You've manually solved this for a few people and they loved it
- The community is actively complaining about this problem
- You can describe the customer and their pain point in one sentence
- You're scratching your own itch
Output
Give the user a clear verdict:
- Validated: Strong signals, proceed to MVP
- Needs more validation: Specific next steps to gather evidence
- Pivot: The idea needs fundamental changes — suggest directions
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