analyze
GitHub用于执行只读的深度仓库分析,提供基于证据的因果、架构或行为解释。通过追踪多文件边界、对比假设并标注置信度与证据来源,在提出变更前明确代码状态。
Trigger Scenarios
Install
npx skills add Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-codex --skill analyze -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "analyze",
"description": "Run read-only deep repository analysis and return a ranked synthesis with explicit confidence, concrete file references, and clear evidence-vs-inference boundaries. Use when a user says 'analyze', 'investigate', 'why does', 'what's causing', or needs grounded cross-file explanation before any changes are proposed."
}
Analyze — Read-Only Deep Analysis
Use $analyze to answer a repository question with grounded, read-only evidence. Explain what the code most likely says; do not turn analysis into implementation or generic fix planning.
Shared operating, delegation, state, hook, team, cancellation, and verification invariants live in templates/AGENTS.md. Follow that source instead of duplicating its rules here.
Use when
- The user needs a causal, architectural, behavioral, impact, or tradeoff explanation.
- The answer requires tracing multiple files or boundaries, or ranking plausible explanations.
- The user needs confidence and concrete evidence before changing anything.
Do not use it for edits, implementation, a new product plan, a simple one-file lookup, or OMX team-runtime operation.
Inputs and method
- Restate the question and define the evidence-backed scope.
- Identify the smallest files, tests, configs, and docs likely to answer it.
- Read direct code paths and contracts first; trace boundaries only as far as needed.
- Compare competing explanations, rank them by support, and mark unresolved points.
- Stop when the question is answered with sufficient evidence, or name the smallest read-only probe that would resolve the remaining uncertainty.
Evidence discipline
Label every material claim as one of:
- Evidence — directly shown by code, tests, generated artifacts, configuration, or docs.
- Inference — a reasoned conclusion drawn from cited evidence.
- Unknown — not settled by the repository evidence.
Prefer direct paths and independent corroboration over contextual clues. Never present guesses as evidence or inference, and never overclaim certainty.
Output contract
Answer the asked question first and use this shape:
Question
Restated question, briefly.
Ranked synthesis
| Rank | Explanation | Confidence | Basis |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | ... | High / Medium / Low | strongest supporting evidence |
| 2 | ... | High / Medium / Low | why it trails |
| 3 | ... | High / Medium / Low | why it remains possible |
Evidence
path/to/file:line-line— direct observation.path/to/file:line-line— corroborating observation.
Inference
- What the evidence most strongly implies.
- Why weaker alternatives were down-ranked.
Unknowns / limits
- What the repository does not establish.
- The next discriminating read-only probe, when useful.
Stop conditions
- Do not edit files, run an implementation lane, or make recommendations the evidence cannot support.
- Do not continue searching after the answer and confidence boundary are grounded.
- If evidence is insufficient, report the limit explicitly rather than manufacturing certainty.
Task: {{ARGUMENTS}}
Version History
-
3ad79a8
Current 2026-08-28 17:53
新增输出格式规范(Question, Ranked synthesis等),强化证据纪律(区分Evidence/Inference/Unknown),明确禁止编辑文件或实施建议,细化停止条件。
- e94437f 2026-08-20 07:18


