A hand-crafted collection of advanced context engineering techniques and patterns with minimal token footprint, focused on improving agent result quality and predictability.
The marketplace is based on prompts our company's developers have used daily for a long time, supplemented by plugins from benchmarked papers and high-quality projects.
Updates from key releases:
/plugin marketplace add NeoLabHQ/context-engineering-kit
This makes all plugins available for installation, but does not load any agents or skills into your context.
Install any plugin — for example, reflexion:
/plugin install reflexion@NeoLabHQ/context-engineering-kit
Each installed plugin loads only its specific agents, commands, and skills into Claude's context.
gemini extensions install https://github.com/NeoLabHQ/context-engineering-kit
**Note:** This installs every plugin's skills and agents as a single bundle — there's no per-plugin selection like Claude Code's. Unfortunately, Gemini CLI does not support per-plugin selection. But you can delete skills and agents that you don't need, after installation.
agy plugin install https://github.com/NeoLabHQ/context-engineering-kit/antigravity
**Note:** This installs every plugin's skills and agents as a single bundle — there's no per-plugin selection like Claude Code's. Unfortunately, Antigravity CLI does not support per-plugin selection. But you can delete skills and agents that you don't need, after installation.
npx skills add NeoLabHQ/context-engineering-kit
You can pick which skills to install.
**Note:** Each provider uses its own agent format and `npx skills` does not support subagents, so this installation method won't provide the full experience.
npx openskills install NeoLabHQ/context-engineering-kit
npx openskills sync
> claude "implement user authentication"
# Claude implements user authentication, then you can ask it to reflect on implementation
> /reflect
# It analyses results and suggests improvements
# If issues are obvious, it will fix them immediately
# If they are minor, it will suggest improvements that you can respond to
> fix the issues
# If you would like to prevent issues found during reflection from appearing again,
# ask Claude to extract resolution strategies and save the insights to project memory
> /memorize
Alternatively, you can use the reflect word in the initial prompt:
> claude "implement user authentication, then reflect"
# Claude implements user authentication,
# then hook automatically runs /reflect
In order to use this hook, you need to have bun installed. However, it is not required for the overall command.
You can find the complete Context Engineering Kit documentation here.
However, the main plugins we recommend starting with are Subagent-Driven Development and Spec-Driven Development.
The three plugins in this marketplace are designed to improve how accurately and consistently the agent follows provided instructions and to reduce hallucinations and bias toward incorrect solutions. They are not competitors but rather complementary to each other, because they allow you to balance reliability vs. token cost. Here is a high-level comparison of different agent usage approaches and the probability of receiving results that are fully accurate and include zero hallucinations, based on task complexity:
| Approach | Probability of receiving fully accurate results for the following number of changed files (p) | Tokens Overhead | What does this mean in practice | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1-3 | 4-10 | 10-20 | 20+ | |||
| One-shot prompt | 60%-80% | 30%-50% | 5%-30% | 1%-20% | 0 | Accuracy depends on model, but with context growth LLM quality degrades exponentially |
| /reflect | 68%-91% | 49%-71% | 13%-41% | 1%-30% | 1k-3k | Agent finds and fixes missed requirements on its own |
| /reflect + /memorize | 79%-87% | 60%-79% | 34%-42% | 5%-30% | 2k-5k | Agent extracts repeatable mistakes and avoids them during new tasks |
| /do-and-judge | 90% | 83% | 60% | 30% | 1.5x-3x | Mitigates context rot, bias, hallucinations and missed requirements using Judge sub-agent |
| /do-in-steps | 92% | 90% | 71% | 50% | 3x-5x | Resolves all issues similar to /do-and-judge, but separately per file group |
| /plan-task + /implement-task | 94% | 93% | 85% | 70% | 5x-20x | Performs the /do-in-steps flow, but the specification mitigates issues caused by inconsistent architecture and codebase size |
| /brainstorm + /plan-task + /implement-task | 95% | 95% | 90% | 80% | 5x-20x | Brainstorming decreases the number of incorrect decisions and missed requirements |
| /plan-task + human review + /implement-task | 99% | 99% | 99% | 95% | 5x-35x | Human review mitigates misunderstanding of requirements by LLM |
Reliability metrics are based on more than year of real development usage on production projects.
To view all available pl
| 日期 | 榜单 | 排名 | 周期新增 | 总 STAR |
|---|