CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

design-an-interface

使用并行子代理为模块生成多个显著不同的接口设计。适用于用户想设计 API、探索接口选项、比较模块形状,或提到 “design it twice” 时。

72

Quality

87%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Design an Interface

基于 “A Philosophy of Software Design” 中的 “Design It Twice”:你的第一个想法很可能不是最好的。生成多个根本不同的 designs,然后比较。

Workflow

1. Gather Requirements

设计前先理解:

  • 这个 module 解决什么问题?
  • callers 是谁?(other modules、external users、tests)
  • key operations 是什么?
  • 有哪些 constraints?(performance、compatibility、existing patterns)
  • 什么应该隐藏在内部,什么应该暴露?

询问:“这个 module 需要做什么?谁会使用它?”

2. Generate Designs (Parallel Sub-Agents)

使用 Task tool 同时生成 3+ 个 sub-agents。每个都必须产出根本不同的 approach。

Prompt template for each sub-agent:

Design an interface for: [module description]

Requirements: [gathered requirements]

Constraints for this design: [assign a different constraint to each agent]
- Agent 1: "Minimize method count - aim for 1-3 methods max"
- Agent 2: "Maximize flexibility - support many use cases"
- Agent 3: "Optimize for the most common case"
- Agent 4: "Take inspiration from [specific paradigm/library]"

Output format:
1. Interface signature (types/methods)
2. Usage example (how caller uses it)
3. What this design hides internally
4. Trade-offs of this approach

3. Present Designs

每个 design 展示:

  1. Interface signature — types、methods、params
  2. Usage examples — callers 在实践中如何使用
  3. What it hides — 保持在内部的 complexity

顺序展示 designs,让用户能在比较前吸收每个 approach。

4. Compare Designs

展示所有 designs 后,按以下维度比较:

  • Interface simplicity:更少 methods、更简单 params
  • General-purpose vs specialized:flexibility vs focus
  • Implementation efficiency:shape 是否允许高效 internals?
  • Depth:小 interface 隐藏大量 complexity(好)vs 大 interface 配薄 implementation(坏)
  • Ease of correct use vs ease of misuse

用 prose 讨论 trade-offs,不用 tables。突出 designs 分歧最大的地方。

5. Synthesize

最好的 design 往往结合多个 options 的 insights。询问:

  • “哪个 design 最适合你的 primary use case?”
  • “其他 designs 中是否有值得合并的 elements?”

Evaluation Criteria

来自 “A Philosophy of Software Design”:

Interface simplicity:更少 methods、更简单 params = 更容易学习和正确使用。

General-purpose:能不改动就处理未来 use cases。但要警惕 over-generalization。

Implementation efficiency:interface shape 是否允许高效 implementation?还是迫使 internals 变别扭?

Depth:小 interface 隐藏大量 complexity = deep module(好)。大 interface 配薄 implementation = shallow module(避免)。

Anti-Patterns

  • 不要让 sub-agents 产出相似 designs;强制 radical difference
  • 不要跳过 comparison;价值在 contrast
  • 不要 implement;这里只讨论 interface shape
  • 不要基于 implementation effort 评价
Repository
vinvcn/mattpocock-skills-zh-CN
Last updated
First committed

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.