Agent Skills › SourceWeft/SourceWeft › feynman

feynman

GitHub

基于费曼学习法，通过简化解释、识别知识盲区、填补空白并精炼表述，帮助用户深度掌握概念。

packages/builtin-skill-feynman/SKILL.md SourceWeft/SourceWeft

Trigger Scenarios

用户调用/feynman命令需要深入理解某个复杂概念或技术原理

Install

npx skills add SourceWeft/SourceWeft --skill feynman -g -y

More Options

Non-standard path

npx skills add https://github.com/SourceWeft/SourceWeft/tree/main/packages/builtin-skill-feynman -g -y

Use without installing

npx skills use SourceWeft/SourceWeft@feynman

指定 Agent (Claude Code)

npx skills add SourceWeft/SourceWeft --skill feynman -a claude-code -g -y

安装 repo 全部 skill

npx skills add SourceWeft/SourceWeft --all -g -y

预览 repo 内 skill

npx skills add SourceWeft/SourceWeft --list

SKILL.md

Frontmatter

{
    "name": "feynman",
    "description": "Use the Feynman technique to deeply learn a concept by explaining it simply, identifying gaps, filling them, and refining the explanation.",
    "argument-hint": "[concept or question to understand]",
    "user-invocable": true,
    "disable-model-invocation": false
}

Feynman Technique

Use this skill when the user invokes /feynman to work through a concept with the full Feynman learning technique.

Treat $ARGUMENTS as the concept, question, or topic to understand. If $ARGUMENTS is empty or too vague, ask exactly one clarifying question before continuing.

Execution Rules

Run the technique end to end instead of only describing it.
Focus on the specific concept named in $ARGUMENTS.
Use plain language and avoid unnecessary jargon.
Be explicit about uncertainty or missing understanding.
When helpful, use a concrete analogy from everyday life.
Keep the result practical and easy to study from.

Output Format

Concept: [What are we trying to understand?]

Step 1: Explain It Simply

Explain as if teaching someone with no background in this field.

Simple Explanation

[Write a plain-language explanation using everyday words.]

Analogy

[Create a familiar analogy that makes the concept easier to grasp.]

Step 2: Identify Gaps

Point out where the explanation becomes fuzzy, hand-wavy, incomplete, or too dependent on jargon.

Gaps Found

Gap	What seems unclear	What needs to be understood better
1	[unclear part]	[underlying question]
2	[unclear part]	[underlying question]
3	[unclear part]	[underlying question]

Jargon Used

Term	Can it be explained simply?
[term]	Yes / No / Partially

Step 3: Fill the Gaps

Resolve the biggest gaps by reasoning carefully from known facts and the user's context. If the user provided source material, stay grounded in it.

Gap 1: [Topic]

The question: [What was unclear?]
The answer: [What we now understand]
Simple version: [How to explain it plainly]

Repeat for as many meaningful gaps as needed.

Step 4: Refined Explanation

Rewrite the explanation after closing the major gaps.

Final Simple Explanation

[Improved, clearer explanation in plain language.]

Improved Analogy

[A better analogy if one helps.]

Key Takeaways

[Core insight 1]
[Core insight 2]
[Core insight 3]

30-Second Version

If someone asked for a short explanation, say:

[A concise, plain-language version.]

Guidance

Do not pretend to understand parts that are still weak.
Prefer clarity over completeness when the tradeoff matters.
If the user is learning interactively, you may end with one focused follow-up question, but only after providing the full Feynman breakdown above.