Skip to content
FunCoding

Search

Search docs, Skills and MCP

zcode-delegate

Delegate a coding task to the Z.AI ZCode CLI as a background implementer, then review its diff and land it yourself. Use this whenever the user wants to hand implementation work to ZCode — phrasings like "have ZCode do X", "delegate this to ZCode", "run it through ZCode", or "use ZCode to implement/fix/refactor" — or to run a queue of coding tasks through ZCode while staying the reviewer. DO NOT USE for tasks small enough to do inline, or when the user wants the code written directly without delegating.

代码质量与审查2.3kskills/zcode-delegate/SKILL.md

Install

Send this to Claude Code, Codex or Cursor. The agent checks the Skill for safety first and installs it only after you confirm.

读取 https://funcoding.ai/skills/amelnagdy/delegate-skills/zcode-delegate/install.md ,按里面的步骤帮我安装这个 Skill。

SKILL.md

ZCode Delegate

You are the orchestrator. This skill lets you hand a bounded coding task to a separate implementer — the Z.AI ZCode CLI — then review what it produced and land it yourself. You write the brief and own the judgment; ZCode does the typing; you verify and commit.

Nothing here is specific to one orchestrating agent. The loop needs only the ability to run a shell command and read a file. (It is designed for and run on Claude Code; treat other orchestrators as designed-for, not yet proven.)

When NOT to use this

  • The task is small enough to just do inline — delegation overhead is not worth it.
  • ZCode is not installed, or its CLI has no model provider configured.
  • You want to write the code yourself, or you only need a review.

Prerequisites (check once)

  1. ZCode is installed. The CLI ships inside the desktop app — it is not on PATH and not on npm. The relay resolves it in this order: --zcode-path <file> or ZCODE_CLI first, then PATH, then the installed app bundle. On Linux the app is an AppImage with no fixed install path, so the flag or the environment variable is required there — the relay guesses nothing.
  2. A model provider is configured for the CLI, with a key it can actually reach. Being signed into the desktop app is not enough — see below.
  3. You are in (or will point --cd at) the target git repository.

The relay records the CLI version and how it was resolved into result.json, so a surprising install is visible after the fact.

Authenticating the headless CLI

Signing into the ZCode desktop app does not authenticate the CLI this relay drives. The CLI keeps its own config at ~/.zcode/cli/config.json, separate from the desktop app's, and nothing bridges the two. zcode login is the intended path, but where it fails with OAuth response is not valid JSON the way in is a Z.AI API key.

Two pieces are needed, and they are separate:

  1. The provider block must exist in ~/.zcode/cli/config.json. It defines the provider, its endpoint and its models — the environment cannot supply this:

    {
      "provider": {
        "zai": {
          "kind": "anthropic",
          "options": { "apiKeyRequired": true, "baseURL": "https://api.z.ai/api/anthropic" },
          "models": { "glm-5.1": { "name": "GLM-5.1" } }
        }
      },
      "model": { "main": "zai/glm-5.1" }
    }
    
  2. The key can live either in provider.zai.options.apiKey in that file, or in the environment as any one of ZAI_API_KEY, ZCODE_API_KEY, or ANTHROPIC_API_KEY. Prefer the environment — it keeps the secret off disk.

If a run fails with Model provider is missing an API key: <provider>, the provider block resolved but no key was found: set one of those variables and re-run.

Autonomy — read this before dispatching

ZCode's own term is mode. It has four values; only two are usable headlessly.

modeBehaviour
yoloWrites. ZCode's own default for --prompt, and this relay's write-capable default.
planRefuses edits. What --read-only selects.
buildRejected by this relay. No permission client exists headlessly, so tools are blocked and the run exits 0 having done nothing.
editRejected for the same reason.

Two limits stated plainly, because ZCode cannot enforce them:

  • plan mode refused edits in testing, but the relay does not treat that as a guarantee. It takes a Git fingerprint before the run and reports a tri-state readOnlyViolation afterwards. Confirm touchedFiles came back empty rather than assuming no edits.
  • ZCode has no --allowed-tools. Only the --disallowed-tools denylist exists, and it is genuinely enforced. An explicit allowlisted tool surface is therefore impossible here — do not assume one.

The loop

Run these five steps per task. Steps 1, 4, and 5 are your judgment; 2 and 3 are mechanical.

1. Write the brief

ZCode sees only what you send — no repo memory, no chat history. Everything the task needs goes in the brief: the goal, the current state, what to change, what to leave untouched, the project's actual gate commands (discover them from the repo's CLAUDE.md/AGENTS.md/Makefile — do not assume), and a report contract. Tell ZCode it will not commit. One task per brief. The relay delivers the brief as an attached file, so the command line no longer bounds its length — the model's context window still does. Full guidance and a template: references/writing-the-brief.md.

2. Dispatch

node "<skill-dir>/scripts/relay.mjs" --brief brief.txt --cd /path/to/repo
# read-only (review/diagnosis, no edits):   add --read-only
# continue a specific session:              add --session <sess_...>  (from result.json; send only the delta brief)
# continue the latest session for --cd:     add --resume-last
# withhold tools (denylist):                add --disallowed-tools "Write,Edit,Bash"
# point at the CLI explicitly:              add --zcode-path /path/to/zcode.cjs
# hard time limit (watchdog):               add --timeout 2h  (default: off)
# see all options:                          node .../relay.mjs --help

(<skill-dir> is this skill's installed directory — the folder containing this SKILL.md.)

The relay writes its artifacts to a temp dir, so the repo under review stays clean. It never commits — see step 5. Mechanics, flags, and the result.json shape: references/dispatch-and-poll.md.

3. Wait for completion

The relay blocks until ZCode finishes, so back it with whatever your orchestrator offers:

  • Claude Code: run the Bash call with run_in_background: true; you are notified on completion.
  • Plain shell / other agents: foreground for short tasks, or background it and poll the result file. The run is done when result.json exists with a status. A pre-run usage error exits 2 and writes no result file, so check the exit code too; a CLI that cannot be found exits 127 but does write a result.json with status zcode_unavailable.

Do not trust progress trackers over reality: read the working tree, not a status line.

4. Review — do not trust the self-report

  • Re-run the project's gates yourself. Never take "gates passed" on faith.
  • Read the diff against the brief: did ZCode do what was asked, nothing more and nothing less? touchedFiles is your starting point.
  • On a --read-only run, check readOnlyViolation and confirm touchedFiles is empty.
  • Run the relevant guard skills on the diff if you have them installed.

Full checklist: references/review-and-land.md.

5. Land it

The orchestrator commits. Only after the gates pass and the diff holds:

  • Commit the verified work yourself, with a clear message.
  • If it needs changes, send a delta brief with --session <sessionId> from the prior result.json, and review again.

Read-only second opinions

The relay doubles as a way to get an adversarial second opinion with no write risk: dispatch --read-only with a brief listing the agreed points, then each contested point with both positions, and ask ZCode to defend or concede each. Because plan mode's guarantee is measured rather than enforced here, verify touchedFiles came back empty instead of assuming no edits.

Authorization model

Delegation is something the human opts into. Once they have, committing verified, gate-passing work is the agreed contract. Two limits: surface, don't absorb (report ZCode's design decisions and defensible-but-unasked turns rather than silently keeping them) and stop for scope changes (if correct completion needs going beyond the brief, ask). The full treatment is in references/review-and-land.md.

References

Similar Skills

claude-api
anthropics/skills180k

claude-api

Reference for the Claude API / Anthropic SDK — model ids, pricing, params, streaming, tool use, MCP, agents, caching, token counting, model migration. TRIGGER — read BEFORE opening the target file; don't skip because it "looks like a one-liner" — whenever: the prompt names Claude/Anthropic in any form (Claude, Anthropic, Fable, Opus, Sonnet, Haiku, `anthropic`, `@anthropic-ai`, `claude-*`, `us.anthropic.*`, `[1m]`); the user asks about an LLM (pricing/model choice/limits/caching) — never answer from memory; OR the task is LLM-shaped with provider unstated (agent/MCP/tool-definition/multi-agent/RAG/LLM-judge/computer-use; generate/summarize/extract/classify/rewrite/converse over NL; debugging refusals/cutoffs/streaming/tool-calls/tokens). SKIP only when another provider is being worked on (overrides all triggers): OpenAI/GPT/Gemini/Llama/Mistral/Cohere/Ollama named in the query; OR `grep -rE 'openai|langchain_openai|google.generativeai|genai|mistralai|cohere|ollama'` over the project hits (run this grep FIRST if no provider named — don't Read the file).

Code quality & review

ponytail-review
DietrichGebert/ponytail158k

ponytail-review

Quality review of a change: is the logic right, is it safe, does it hold under real load, is risky code tested, is it fast enough, and is every line needed. Reads the connected code, not only the diff. Each finding is explained in plain English. Use for "review this", "code review", "review the last commit", "review my PR", "is this over-engineered", /ponytail-review.

Code quality & review

code-review-and-quality
addyosmani/agent-skills103k

code-review-and-quality

Conducts multi-axis code review. Use before merging any change. Use when reviewing code written by yourself, another agent, or a human. Use when you need to assess code quality across multiple dimensions before it enters the main branch. Use when asked to review a diff or a pull request, even when the diff is pasted inline.

Code quality & review

documentation-and-adrs
addyosmani/agent-skills103k

documentation-and-adrs

Records decisions and documentation. Use when you need to document an architecture decision (ADR) or the reasoning behind a design choice, when changing public APIs, shipping features, or when you need to record context that future engineers and agents will need to understand the codebase.

Code quality & review

code-simplification
addyosmani/agent-skills103k

code-simplification

Simplifies code for clarity. Use when refactoring code for clarity without changing behavior. Use when code works but is harder to read, maintain, or extend than it should be. Use when reviewing code that has accumulated unnecessary complexity.

Code quality & review

understand
Egonex-AI/Understand-Anything86k

understand

Analyze a codebase to produce an interactive knowledge graph for understanding architecture, components, and relationships

Code quality & review