req-change-workflow
Standardize requirement/feature changes in an existing codebase (especially Chrome extensions) by turning "改需求/需求变更/调整交互/改功能/重构流程" into a repeatable loop: clarify acceptance criteria, confirm current behavior from code, assess impact/risk, design the new logic, implement with small diffs, run a fixed regression checklist, and update docs/decision log. Use when the user feels the change process is chaotic, when edits tend to sprawl across files, or when changes touch manifest/service worker/OAuth/storage/UI and need reliable verification + rollback planning.
Best use case
req-change-workflow is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
Standardize requirement/feature changes in an existing codebase (especially Chrome extensions) by turning "改需求/需求变更/调整交互/改功能/重构流程" into a repeatable loop: clarify acceptance criteria, confirm current behavior from code, assess impact/risk, design the new logic, implement with small diffs, run a fixed regression checklist, and update docs/decision log. Use when the user feels the change process is chaotic, when edits tend to sprawl across files, or when changes touch manifest/service worker/OAuth/storage/UI and need reliable verification + rollback planning.
Teams using req-change-workflow should expect a more consistent output, faster repeated execution, less prompt rewriting.
When to use this skill
- You want a reusable workflow that can be run more than once with consistent structure.
When not to use this skill
- You only need a quick one-off answer and do not need a reusable workflow.
- You cannot install or maintain the underlying files, dependencies, or repository context.
Installation
Claude Code / Cursor / Codex
Manual Installation
- Download SKILL.md from GitHub
- Place it in
.claude/skills/req-change-workflow/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How req-change-workflow Compares
| Feature / Agent | req-change-workflow | Standard Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Platform Support | Not specified | Limited / Varies |
| Context Awareness | High | Baseline |
| Installation Complexity | Unknown | N/A |
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this skill do?
Standardize requirement/feature changes in an existing codebase (especially Chrome extensions) by turning "改需求/需求变更/调整交互/改功能/重构流程" into a repeatable loop: clarify acceptance criteria, confirm current behavior from code, assess impact/risk, design the new logic, implement with small diffs, run a fixed regression checklist, and update docs/decision log. Use when the user feels the change process is chaotic, when edits tend to sprawl across files, or when changes touch manifest/service worker/OAuth/storage/UI and need reliable verification + rollback planning.
Where can I find the source code?
You can find the source code on GitHub using the link provided at the top of the page.
Related Guides
Top AI Agents for Productivity
See the top AI agent skills for productivity, workflow automation, operational systems, documentation, and everyday task execution.
Best AI Skills for Claude
Explore the best AI skills for Claude and Claude Code across coding, research, workflow automation, documentation, and agent operations.
ChatGPT vs Claude for Agent Skills
Compare ChatGPT and Claude for AI agent skills across coding, writing, research, and reusable workflow execution.
SKILL.md Source
# Req Change Workflow ## Overview Use a lightweight, repeatable workflow to modify an existing requirement without scope creep or “边改边炸”. Produce clear artifacts at each gate so the user can approve before the implementation starts. ## Workflow (gated loop) Follow the steps in order. Do not implement code changes until the user approves Step 4. ### Step 0: Set the plan (optional but recommended) - Use `update_plan` to create 5–7 short steps: clarify → baseline → impact → design → implement → validate → document. - Keep exactly one step `in_progress` at a time and advance as you finish. ### Step 1: Clarify the change (lock scope first) Ask the user for the minimal inputs, then rewrite them into a clear “change brief”: - Target (1 sentence): what outcome changes. - Out of scope (1 sentence): explicitly what must NOT change. - Acceptance criteria (3–6 bullets): observable behaviors that can be verified. - “Must keep” constraints: compatibility, performance, security, no new dependencies, no network, etc. - Rollback expectation: can we revert by reverting a diff, or does it require data migration/backfill? Use the template in `references/change-brief-template.md`. ### Step 2: Confirm current behavior from code (baseline) Do not trust memory or assumptions. Locate the real entrypoints + current data flow and summarize it in 5–10 lines: - UI entrypoints (e.g., `sidepanel/`, `options/`) and where user actions are wired. - Background orchestration (e.g., `service_worker.js`). - Core modules (e.g., `src/core/...`) and storage (`src/core/local/...`). - Config/permissions changes (e.g., `manifest.json`). Use `scripts/impact_scan.sh` to quickly find likely files, then read only the necessary ones. Output artifact: “Current behavior summary” + a short file list (with why each file matters). ### Step 3: Impact + risk assessment (change budget) Before proposing a new design, list: - Files/modules that must change and why. - Risks: auth/session, storage migration, concurrency, caching, permission scopes, UX regressions. - Testing checkpoints: what to verify manually (use `references/regression-checklist.md`). - Rollback plan: what is safe to revert; what needs cleanup. If changes touch `manifest.json` or `service_worker.js`, require a manual reload step in the validation plan (Chrome extensions cache aggressively). Output artifact: “Impact & risk list” + “Rollback plan (1–3 bullets)”. ### Step 4: Propose the new design (get approval) Describe the new behavior using: - New flow (bullet sequence) including edge cases. - State model: key states, transitions, and failure recovery. - Change boundaries: what stays unchanged. - Observability: logs/events/UI hints for debugging. Then ask the user to approve: - The acceptance criteria (Step 1) as final. - The file list (Step 2/3) as the change budget. - The proposed design (this step). Do not start editing code until the user says “同意/OK/按这个做”. ### Step 5: Implement with minimal, localized diffs Implementation rules: - Prefer root-cause fixes over patches, but keep diffs small and focused. - Avoid scattering logic across multiple entrypoints; centralize in one module when possible. - Keep ES module imports explicit; avoid implicit globals. - Add short JSDoc for exported functions when introducing new exports. - User-visible logs: actionable Chinese messages (explain what to do next). If the change involves async flows/cross-module calls/fallbacks, add Chinese comments explaining assumptions and failure handling. ### Step 6: Validate (fixed regression loop) - Run the manual pages referenced in `references/regression-checklist.md`. - If `manifest.json` or `service_worker.js` changed: reload the extension before retesting. - Record what you tested and the observed outcome (even if it is manual). ### Step 7: Maintain (docs + decision log) - Update project docs or inline notes for future maintainers. - Add a short “Decision log” entry: why this design, what alternatives were rejected, and how to roll back. Use the template in `references/decision-log-template.md`. ## Resources ### scripts/ - `scripts/impact_scan.sh`: fast file candidate scan via `rg` for keywords + common extension entrypoints. ### references/ - `references/change-brief-template.md`: input template to lock scope + acceptance criteria. - `references/regression-checklist.md`: manual regression checklist for this repo’s Chrome extension. - `references/decision-log-template.md`: lightweight decision record template.
Related Skills
writing-assistant
写作助手 - 当用户说"我想写XX"、"帮我梳理选题"、"怎么形成框架"、"给我组织思路"时触发。根据观点清晰度自动选择最优路线:清晰观点走"框架→内容",模糊观点走"挖掘→选题→框架→内容"。
weekly-report
帮助用户梳理周报,按照完整逻辑展示工作价值和边界。当用户说"写周报"、"周报"、"梳理周报"、"整理工作"时触发。
vision-exploration
终局愿景探索。用户抛出一个模糊 idea,AI 主导引导,通过"追问价值 → 挖掘动机 → 推导演化 → 画终局"的链路,帮用户看到未来最远的可能性。不设限,不收敛,纯发散。
version-planner
帮助用户把产品需求拆解成渐进式版本规划。当用户说"拆版本"、"版本规划"、"MVP怎么做"、"分阶段实现"时触发。
ui-design
UI 样式修改协作流程。当用户要求修改页面样式、调整布局、改 UI 细节时使用。通过"截图定位 → 现状描述 → 方案选择 → 改代码 → 微调"的结构化流程,减少沟通偏差,避免浪费 token。
thought-mining
思维挖掘助手 - 通过对话帮助用户把脑子里的零散想法倒出来、记录下来、整理成文章。覆盖从思维挖掘到成稿的完整流程。
thinking-partner
思考拍档 - 陪你从混沌中理清局面,锁定核心问题,拆解卡点,共创解法,落地行动
project-map-builder
生成或更新用户指定文件夹的 PROJECT_MAP.md。适用于用户要求目录地图/项目地图/代码仓概览/文件夹级说明/更新已有 PROJECT_MAP.md 的场景。必须先询问要扫描的文件夹范围,禁止默认全仓库扫描;支持单目录或多目录(合并或分别生成)。
product-naming
产品命名协作流程。当用户想给产品/项目/模块起名字时使用。通过"灵魂挖掘 → 约束提取 → 路线发散 → 方向选择 → 竞品验证 → 最终确认"的结构化流程,从模糊想法产出有品牌生命力的名字,避免拍脑袋起名。
priority-judge
优先级判断助手 - 帮用户从混沌的待办事项中判断优先级,确定现在该做什么。当用户说"我有很多事要做"、"帮我理一下"、"排个优先级"、"今天该做什么"时触发。
prd-doc-writer
Write and iteratively refine PRD/需求文档 with a story-driven structure and strict staged confirmations (journey map alignment, per-story single-point confirmation, final generation gate). Use when the user asks to 梳理/撰写/完善 PRD、需求文档、用户故事、验收标准,并希望用 ASCII 线框图与 Mermaid(流程图/状态图/时序图)来减少歧义、共同完成文档。
memory-init
在当前目录下初始化记忆系统,生成 CLAUDE.md(可选 AGENT.md 给 Cursor 用)、MEMORY.md 和 memory/ 目录。当用户说"初始化记忆"、"搭建记忆"、"memory init"、"/memory-init"时触发。