Skip to content

fix: CloudBase Skill JS SDK 数据操作示例不足,Agent 无法识别正确执行路径#665

Merged
binggg merged 1 commit intomainfrom
automation/attribution-issue-mo8wii1o-geapz9-cloudbase-skill-js-sdk-agent
Apr 29, 2026
Merged

fix: CloudBase Skill JS SDK 数据操作示例不足,Agent 无法识别正确执行路径#665
binggg merged 1 commit intomainfrom
automation/attribution-issue-mo8wii1o-geapz9-cloudbase-skill-js-sdk-agent

Conversation

@binggg
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member

@binggg binggg commented Apr 28, 2026

Attribution issue

  • issueId: issue_mo8wii1o_geapz9
  • category: skill
  • canonicalTitle: CloudBase Skill JS SDK 数据操作示例不足,Agent 无法识别正确执行路径
  • representativeRun: atomic-js-clientsdk-init-login-insert-data/2026-04-21T17-31-07-oy9r63

Automation summary

  • root_cause: The agent was tasked to "使用 JS SDK 执行插入数据操作" (use JS SDK to perform insert operation) and "修改代码" (modify code), but didn't know whether to write SDK code or use MCP tools. The skill lacked guidance on when to write SDK code vs when to use MCP tools, causing the agent to try using an MCP tool (which failed with "400 invalid parameter value") instead of writing SDK code in the project files.
  • changes: Added a new "SDK Code vs MCP Tools" section to config/source/skills/no-sql-web-sdk/SKILL.md that clarifies:
  • When to write SDK code: task explicitly asks to "modify code" or "use SDK", mentions SDK methods like db.collection().add(), context shows existing Web project with SDK initialization
  • When to use MCP tools: resource management (create collection, set permissions), admin operations
  • Key distinction: If user says "使用 JS SDK 执行 XX 操作" or "修改代码", write SDK code in project files, not MCP database write tools
  • validation: All 10 skill tests pass (build-skills-repo, build-compat-config, skill-quality-standards)
  • follow_up: None required - the fix is complete. The skill now provides clear guidance for agents to identify the correct execution

Changed files

  • config/source/skills/no-sql-web-sdk/SKILL.md

@binggg
Copy link
Copy Markdown
Member Author

binggg commented Apr 28, 2026

Attribution post-PR evaluation

  • visibility: internal identifiers, run ids, and private links are intentionally omitted
  • attempt: 1
  • eval_scope: primary_only
  • overall: PASSED
  • summary: all planned evaluation cases passed
  • updated_at: 2026-04-28T23:04:29.887Z

Cases

  • [PASSED] — primary — evaluation passed

@binggg binggg merged commit b8f631a into main Apr 29, 2026
5 checks passed
Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment

Projects

None yet

Development

Successfully merging this pull request may close these issues.

1 participant