From bacb69b569891828ed79f6f178593566be736f06 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: JE-Chen <zenmailman@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2026 10:24:37 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 1/3] Update dev version

* Update code-review prompts
* Split code-review thread to another file
---
 .../extend_ai_gui/ai_gui_global_variable.py   |  4 -
 .../extend_ai_gui/code_review/__init__.py     |  0
 .../code_review_thread.py}                    | 90 +-----------------
 .../code_review/cot_code_review_gui.py        | 82 +++++++++++++++++
 .../cot_code_review_prompt_templates/judge.py | 91 +++++++++++++++++++
 .../judge_single_review.py                    | 85 +++++++++++++++++
 .../linter.py                                 | 26 +++---
 .../step_by_step_analysis.py                  | 35 +++++++
 .../extend_ai_gui/skills/__init__.py          |  0
 .../{ => skills}/skills_send_gui.py           |  0
 .../menu/tools/tools_menu.py                  |  2 +-
 pyproject.toml                                |  2 +-
 12 files changed, 311 insertions(+), 106 deletions(-)
 create mode 100644 automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/code_review/__init__.py
 rename automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/{cot_code_review_gui.py => code_review/code_review_thread.py} (51%)
 create mode 100644 automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/code_review/cot_code_review_gui.py
 create mode 100644 automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/prompt_edit_gui/cot_code_review_prompt_templates/judge.py
 create mode 100644 automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/prompt_edit_gui/cot_code_review_prompt_templates/judge_single_review.py
 create mode 100644 automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/prompt_edit_gui/cot_code_review_prompt_templates/step_by_step_analysis.py
 create mode 100644 automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/skills/__init__.py
 rename automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/{ => skills}/skills_send_gui.py (100%)

diff --git a/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/ai_gui_global_variable.py b/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/ai_gui_global_variable.py
index 1fff991..158817e 100644
--- a/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/ai_gui_global_variable.py
+++ b/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/ai_gui_global_variable.py
@@ -4,8 +4,6 @@
     FIRST_CODE_REVIEW_TEMPLATE
 from automation_ide.automation_editor_ui.extend_ai_gui.prompt_edit_gui.cot_code_review_prompt_templates.first_summary_prompt import \
     FIRST_SUMMARY_TEMPLATE
-from automation_ide.automation_editor_ui.extend_ai_gui.prompt_edit_gui.cot_code_review_prompt_templates.global_rule import \
-    GLOBAL_RULE_TEMPLATE
 from automation_ide.automation_editor_ui.extend_ai_gui.prompt_edit_gui.cot_code_review_prompt_templates.linter import \
     LINTER_TEMPLATE
 from automation_ide.automation_editor_ui.extend_ai_gui.prompt_edit_gui.cot_code_review_prompt_templates.total_summary import \
@@ -16,7 +14,6 @@
     CODE_REVIEW_SKILL_TEMPLATE
 
 COT_TEMPLATE_FILES = [
-    "global_rule.md",
     "first_summary_prompt.md",
     "first_code_review.md",
     "linter.md",
@@ -25,7 +22,6 @@
 ]
 
 COT_TEMPLATE_RELATION = {
-    "global_rule.md": GLOBAL_RULE_TEMPLATE,
     "first_summary_prompt.md": FIRST_SUMMARY_TEMPLATE,
     "first_code_review.md": FIRST_CODE_REVIEW_TEMPLATE,
     "linter.md": LINTER_TEMPLATE,
diff --git a/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/code_review/__init__.py b/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/code_review/__init__.py
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e69de29
diff --git a/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/cot_code_review_gui.py b/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/code_review/code_review_thread.py
similarity index 51%
rename from automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/cot_code_review_gui.py
rename to automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/code_review/code_review_thread.py
index 014dde5..62b07af 100644
--- a/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/cot_code_review_gui.py
+++ b/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/code_review/code_review_thread.py
@@ -1,21 +1,13 @@
-import sys
-
+# Worker Thread 負責傳送資料
 import requests
 from PySide6.QtCore import QThread, Signal
-from PySide6.QtWidgets import (
-    QApplication, QWidget, QVBoxLayout, QHBoxLayout,
-    QPushButton, QTextEdit, QLabel, QLineEdit, QComboBox, QMessageBox
-)
 from je_editor import language_wrapper
 
-from automation_ide.automation_editor_ui.extend_ai_gui.ai_gui_global_variable import COT_TEMPLATE_FILES, \
-    COT_TEMPLATE_RELATION
+from automation_ide.automation_editor_ui.extend_ai_gui.ai_gui_global_variable import COT_TEMPLATE_RELATION
 from automation_ide.automation_editor_ui.extend_ai_gui.prompt_edit_gui.cot_code_review_prompt_templates.global_rule import \
     build_global_rule_template
-from automation_ide.automation_editor_ui.extend_multi_language.update_language_dict import update_language_dict
 
 
-# Worker Thread 負責傳送資料
 class SenderThread(QThread):
     update_response = Signal(str, str)  # (filename, response)
 
@@ -86,80 +78,4 @@ def run(self):
                 reply_text = f"{language_wrapper.language_word_dict.get("cot_gui_error_sending")} {file} {e}"
 
             # 發送訊號更新 UI
-            self.update_response.emit(file, reply_text)
-
-
-class CoTCodeReviewGUI(QWidget):
-    def __init__(self):
-        super().__init__()
-        self.setWindowTitle(language_wrapper.language_word_dict.get("cot_gui_window_title"))
-
-        # 檔案清單
-        self.files = COT_TEMPLATE_FILES
-
-        # UI 元件
-        layout = QVBoxLayout()
-
-        # URL 輸入框
-        url_layout = QHBoxLayout()
-        url_layout.addWidget(QLabel(language_wrapper.language_word_dict.get("cot_gui_label_api_url")))
-        self.url_input = QLineEdit()
-        self.url_input.setPlaceholderText(language_wrapper.language_word_dict.get("cot_gui_placeholder_api_url"))
-        url_layout.addWidget(self.url_input)
-        layout.addLayout(url_layout)
-
-        # 傳送資料區域
-        self.code_paste_area = QTextEdit()
-        self.code_paste_area.setPlaceholderText(
-            language_wrapper.language_word_dict.get("cot_gui_placeholder_code_paste_area"))
-        layout.addWidget(QLabel(language_wrapper.language_word_dict.get("cot_gui_label_prompt_area")))
-        layout.addWidget(self.code_paste_area)
-
-        # 回傳區域
-        self.response_selector = QComboBox()  # 改用 ComboBox
-        self.response_view = QTextEdit()
-        self.response_view.setReadOnly(True)  # 可複製但不可編輯
-
-        hbox_layout = QHBoxLayout()
-        hbox_layout.addWidget(self.response_selector, 2)
-        hbox_layout.addWidget(self.response_view, 5)
-
-        layout.addWidget(QLabel(language_wrapper.language_word_dict.get("cot_gui_label_response_area")))
-        layout.addLayout(hbox_layout)
-
-        # 傳送按鈕
-        self.send_button = QPushButton(language_wrapper.language_word_dict.get("cot_gui_button_send"))
-        layout.addWidget(self.send_button)
-
-        self.setLayout(layout)
-
-        # 綁定事件
-        self.response_selector.currentTextChanged.connect(self.show_response)
-        self.send_button.clicked.connect(self.start_sending)
-
-        # 儲存回覆
-        self.responses = {}
-
-    def show_response(self, filename):
-        if filename in self.responses:
-            self.response_view.setPlainText(self.responses[filename])
-
-    def start_sending(self):
-        # 取得 URL
-        url = self.url_input.text().strip()
-        if not url:
-            message_box = QMessageBox()
-            message_box.warning(self, "Warning", language_wrapper.language_word_dict.get("cot_gui_error_no_url"))
-            message_box.exec_()
-            return
-
-        # 啟動傳送 Thread
-        self.thread = SenderThread(files=self.files, code=self.code_paste_area.toPlainText(), url=url)
-        self.thread.update_response.connect(self.handle_response)
-        self.thread.start()
-
-    def handle_response(self, filename, response):
-        self.responses[filename] = response
-        self.response_selector.addItem(filename)  # 加入 ComboBox
-        # 自動顯示最新回覆
-        self.response_selector.setCurrentText(filename)
+            self.update_response.emit(file, reply_text)
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/code_review/cot_code_review_gui.py b/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/code_review/cot_code_review_gui.py
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..947e5ea
--- /dev/null
+++ b/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/code_review/cot_code_review_gui.py
@@ -0,0 +1,82 @@
+from PySide6.QtWidgets import QWidget, QVBoxLayout, QHBoxLayout, QLabel, QLineEdit, QTextEdit, QComboBox, QPushButton, \
+    QMessageBox
+from je_editor import language_wrapper
+
+from automation_ide.automation_editor_ui.extend_ai_gui.ai_gui_global_variable import COT_TEMPLATE_FILES
+from automation_ide.automation_editor_ui.extend_ai_gui.code_review.code_review_thread import SenderThread
+
+
+class CoTCodeReviewGUI(QWidget):
+    def __init__(self):
+        super().__init__()
+        self.setWindowTitle(language_wrapper.language_word_dict.get("cot_gui_window_title"))
+
+        # 檔案清單
+        self.files = COT_TEMPLATE_FILES
+
+        # UI 元件
+        layout = QVBoxLayout()
+
+        # URL 輸入框
+        url_layout = QHBoxLayout()
+        url_layout.addWidget(QLabel(language_wrapper.language_word_dict.get("cot_gui_label_api_url")))
+        self.url_input = QLineEdit()
+        self.url_input.setPlaceholderText(language_wrapper.language_word_dict.get("cot_gui_placeholder_api_url"))
+        url_layout.addWidget(self.url_input)
+        layout.addLayout(url_layout)
+
+        # 傳送資料區域
+        self.code_paste_area = QTextEdit()
+        self.code_paste_area.setPlaceholderText(
+            language_wrapper.language_word_dict.get("cot_gui_placeholder_code_paste_area"))
+        layout.addWidget(QLabel(language_wrapper.language_word_dict.get("cot_gui_label_prompt_area")))
+        layout.addWidget(self.code_paste_area)
+
+        # 回傳區域
+        self.response_selector = QComboBox()  # 改用 ComboBox
+        self.response_view = QTextEdit()
+        self.response_view.setReadOnly(True)  # 可複製但不可編輯
+
+        hbox_layout = QHBoxLayout()
+        hbox_layout.addWidget(self.response_selector, 2)
+        hbox_layout.addWidget(self.response_view, 5)
+
+        layout.addWidget(QLabel(language_wrapper.language_word_dict.get("cot_gui_label_response_area")))
+        layout.addLayout(hbox_layout)
+
+        # 傳送按鈕
+        self.send_button = QPushButton(language_wrapper.language_word_dict.get("cot_gui_button_send"))
+        layout.addWidget(self.send_button)
+
+        self.setLayout(layout)
+
+        # 綁定事件
+        self.response_selector.currentTextChanged.connect(self.show_response)
+        self.send_button.clicked.connect(self.start_sending)
+
+        # 儲存回覆
+        self.responses = {}
+
+    def show_response(self, filename):
+        if filename in self.responses:
+            self.response_view.setPlainText(self.responses[filename])
+
+    def start_sending(self):
+        # 取得 URL
+        url = self.url_input.text().strip()
+        if not url:
+            message_box = QMessageBox()
+            message_box.warning(self, "Warning", language_wrapper.language_word_dict.get("cot_gui_error_no_url"))
+            message_box.exec_()
+            return
+
+        # 啟動傳送 Thread
+        self.thread = SenderThread(files=self.files, code=self.code_paste_area.toPlainText(), url=url)
+        self.thread.update_response.connect(self.handle_response)
+        self.thread.start()
+
+    def handle_response(self, filename, response):
+        self.responses[filename] = response
+        self.response_selector.addItem(filename)  # 加入 ComboBox
+        # 自動顯示最新回覆
+        self.response_selector.setCurrentText(filename)
diff --git a/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/prompt_edit_gui/cot_code_review_prompt_templates/judge.py b/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/prompt_edit_gui/cot_code_review_prompt_templates/judge.py
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..a536c06
--- /dev/null
+++ b/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/prompt_edit_gui/cot_code_review_prompt_templates/judge.py
@@ -0,0 +1,91 @@
+JUDGE_TEMPLATE = """
+# Code Review Comment Evaluation Template (Enhanced)
+
+Please evaluate the review comments focusing on how well they address important issues in the code, especially leveraging code smell and linter messages.  
+The input may contain multiple independent review reports.
+
+Score range: 1–100
+
+Five evaluation dimensions:
+### 1. Readability
+    - 1–20: Comments are very hard to understand, poorly structured, confusing language.
+    - 21–40: Some parts are readable, but many unclear sections remain.
+    - 41–60: Comments are generally clear, but structure or phrasing needs improvement.
+    - 61–80: Comments are well-structured, consistent, and easy to follow.
+    - 81–100: Comments are highly readable, elegantly phrased, and well-organized.
+
+### 2. Constructiveness (Maintainability)
+    - 1–20: Comments lack constructive suggestions, no improvement direction.
+    - 21–40: Comments provide partial suggestions, but vague or impractical.
+    - 41–60: Comments offer basic improvement ideas, somewhat helpful.
+    - 61–80: Comments are specific and actionable, clearly guiding improvements.
+    - 81–100: Comments are highly constructive, offering clear and practical improvement paths.
+
+### 3. Correctness
+    - 1–20: Comments contain errors or misleading advice.
+    - 21–40: Mostly correct, but important issues are overlooked.
+    - 41–60: Largely correct, with only minor gaps.
+    - 61–80: Correct and reasonable, with small room for refinement.
+    - 81–100: Fully correct, logically sound, and precise in identifying issues.
+
+### 4. Multi-Review Coverage, Structural Independence & Extractability
+
+    > Evaluate how well the comments cover important issues across multiple review reports, and whether each comment block is structurally independent, self-contained, and understandable on its own.
+
+    #### Scoring Criteria
+
+    - **1–20**  
+      Rarely addresses important issues; structure is disorganized; comments heavily depend on surrounding context; blocks cannot be read independently; unclear linkage to specific code smells or linter messages.
+
+    - **21–40**  
+      Addresses some issues but misses many key points; unclear boundaries between sections; frequent cross-references required for understanding; difficult to isolate specific issue blocks.
+
+    - **41–60**  
+      Covers many important issues; basic structure is present; some blocks can be read independently, but certain sections still rely on context or lack completeness.
+
+    - **61–80**  
+      Most key issues are addressed; comment blocks are clearly structured with defined themes; most sections can be independently read and understood (problem + reasoning + suggestion); code smell / linter-related blocks are reasonably extractable.
+
+    - **81–100**  
+      Thoroughly addresses key issues; each comment block is **independent, complete, and self-contained** (including problem description, impact explanation, and actionable improvement suggestions);  
+      clearly segmented structure; any block can be extracted without losing meaning;  
+      strongly aligned with specific code smells or linter messages; highly readable and maintainable.
+    ---
+    ### Additional Evaluation Criteria
+
+    When scoring this dimension, explicitly check whether each comment block:
+    - Has a clear title or thematic focus  
+    - Clearly identifies the issue source (e.g., specific code smell or linter message)  
+    - Explains impact or risk  
+    - Provides concrete and actionable improvement suggestions  
+    - Does not rely on other sections for comprehension  
+
+    Also assess whether:
+    - A single comment block can be extracted and shared independently without losing clarity  
+    - Code smell or linter-related sections can be isolated for structured analysis  
+    - Summary sections and detailed comments are clearly distinguished  
+
+### 5. Comprehensiveness
+    - 1–20: Comments fail to address any code smells or linter findings.
+    - 21–40: Comments mention at least one code smell or linter warning.
+    - 41–60: Comments cover some code smells or linter findings.
+    - 61–80: Comments cover most code smells and linter findings.
+    - 81–100: Comments comprehensively address all code smells and linter findings, with improvement suggestions.
+
+Reviewers should:
+- Assign a score (1–100) for each dimension.
+- Provide brief reasoning for each score.
+- Conclude with an average score and overall recommendation.
+
+## Review Comment:
+{review_comment}
+
+## Code Smells:
+{code_smell_detector_messages}
+
+## Linter Messages:
+{linter_messages}
+
+## Origin code
+{code_diff}
+"""
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/prompt_edit_gui/cot_code_review_prompt_templates/judge_single_review.py b/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/prompt_edit_gui/cot_code_review_prompt_templates/judge_single_review.py
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..4e8ed8f
--- /dev/null
+++ b/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/prompt_edit_gui/cot_code_review_prompt_templates/judge_single_review.py
@@ -0,0 +1,85 @@
+JUDGE_SINGLE_REVIEW_TEMPLATE = """
+# Code Review Comment Evaluation Template (Enhanced)
+
+Please evaluate the review comments focusing on how well they address important issues in the code, especially leveraging code smell and linter messages.  
+The input may contain multiple independent review reports.
+
+Score range: 1–100
+
+Five evaluation dimensions:
+### 1. Readability
+    - 1–20: Comments are very hard to understand, poorly structured, confusing language.
+    - 21–40: Some parts are readable, but many unclear sections remain.
+    - 41–60: Comments are generally clear, but structure or phrasing needs improvement.
+    - 61–80: Comments are well-structured, consistent, and easy to follow.
+    - 81–100: Comments are highly readable, elegantly phrased, and well-organized.
+
+### 2. Constructiveness (Maintainability)
+    - 1–20: Comments lack constructive suggestions, no improvement direction.
+    - 21–40: Comments provide partial suggestions, but vague or impractical.
+    - 41–60: Comments offer basic improvement ideas, somewhat helpful.
+    - 61–80: Comments are specific and actionable, clearly guiding improvements.
+    - 81–100: Comments are highly constructive, offering clear and practical improvement paths.
+
+### 3. Correctness
+    - 1–20: Comments contain errors or misleading advice.
+    - 21–40: Mostly correct, but important issues are overlooked.
+    - 41–60: Largely correct, with only minor gaps.
+    - 61–80: Correct and reasonable, with small room for refinement.
+    - 81–100: Fully correct, logically sound, and precise in identifying issues.
+
+### 4. Multi-Review Coverage, Structural Independence & Extractability
+
+    > Evaluate how well the comments cover important issues across multiple review reports, and whether each comment block is structurally independent, self-contained, and understandable on its own.
+
+    #### Scoring Criteria
+
+    - **1–20**  
+      Rarely addresses important issues; structure is disorganized; comments heavily depend on surrounding context; blocks cannot be read independently; unclear linkage to specific code smells or linter messages.
+
+    - **21–40**  
+      Addresses some issues but misses many key points; unclear boundaries between sections; frequent cross-references required for understanding; difficult to isolate specific issue blocks.
+
+    - **41–60**  
+      Covers many important issues; basic structure is present; some blocks can be read independently, but certain sections still rely on context or lack completeness.
+
+    - **61–80**  
+      Most key issues are addressed; comment blocks are clearly structured with defined themes; most sections can be independently read and understood (problem + reasoning + suggestion); code smell / linter-related blocks are reasonably extractable.
+
+    - **81–100**  
+      Thoroughly addresses key issues; each comment block is **independent, complete, and self-contained** (including problem description, impact explanation, and actionable improvement suggestions);  
+      clearly segmented structure; any block can be extracted without losing meaning;  
+      strongly aligned with specific code smells or linter messages; highly readable and maintainable.
+    ---
+    ### Additional Evaluation Criteria
+
+    When scoring this dimension, explicitly check whether each comment block:
+    - Has a clear title or thematic focus  
+    - Clearly identifies the issue source (e.g., specific code smell or linter message)  
+    - Explains impact or risk  
+    - Provides concrete and actionable improvement suggestions  
+    - Does not rely on other sections for comprehension  
+
+    Also assess whether:
+    - A single comment block can be extracted and shared independently without losing clarity  
+    - Code smell or linter-related sections can be isolated for structured analysis  
+    - Summary sections and detailed comments are clearly distinguished  
+
+### 5. Comprehensiveness
+    - 1–20: Comments fail to address any code smells or linter findings.
+    - 21–40: Comments mention at least one code smell or linter warning.
+    - 41–60: Comments cover some code smells or linter findings.
+    - 61–80: Comments cover most code smells and linter findings.
+    - 81–100: Comments comprehensively address all code smells and linter findings, with improvement suggestions.
+
+Reviewers should:
+- Assign a score (1–100) for each dimension.
+- Provide brief reasoning for each score.
+- Conclude with an average score and overall recommendation.
+
+## Review Comment:
+{review_comment}
+
+## Origin code
+{code_diff}
+"""
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/prompt_edit_gui/cot_code_review_prompt_templates/linter.py b/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/prompt_edit_gui/cot_code_review_prompt_templates/linter.py
index 182539c..863794f 100644
--- a/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/prompt_edit_gui/cot_code_review_prompt_templates/linter.py
+++ b/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/prompt_edit_gui/cot_code_review_prompt_templates/linter.py
@@ -1,17 +1,17 @@
 LINTER_TEMPLATE = """
-You are a strict code linter. 
-Your task is to analyze the given source code and produce structured linter_messages. 
-Follow these rules:
+    You are a strict code linter. 
+    Your task is to analyze the given source code and produce structured linter_messages. 
+    Follow these rules:
 
-1. Do not rewrite or fix the code — only report issues.
-2. Each linter_message must include:
-   - rule_id: A short identifier for the rule violated (e.g., "no-unused-vars").
-   - severity: One of ["error", "warning", "info"].
-   - message: A clear explanation of the issue.
-   - line: The line number where the issue occurs.
-   - suggestion: A concise recommendation for improvement.
-3. If no issues are found, return an empty list.
+    1. Do not rewrite or fix the code — only report issues.
+    2. Each linter_message must include:
+       - rule_id: A short identifier for the rule violated (e.g., "no-unused-vars").
+       - severity: One of ["error", "warning", "info"].
+       - message: A clear explanation of the issue.
+       - line: The line number where the issue occurs.
+       - suggestion: A concise recommendation for improvement.
+    3. If no issues are found, return an empty list.
 
-Now analyze the following code:
-{code_diff}
+    Now analyze the following code:
+    {code_diff}
 """
\ No newline at end of file
diff --git a/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/prompt_edit_gui/cot_code_review_prompt_templates/step_by_step_analysis.py b/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/prompt_edit_gui/cot_code_review_prompt_templates/step_by_step_analysis.py
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..51f18c5
--- /dev/null
+++ b/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/prompt_edit_gui/cot_code_review_prompt_templates/step_by_step_analysis.py
@@ -0,0 +1,35 @@
+STEP_BY_STEP_ANALYSIS_TEMPLATE = """
+You are a code quality reviewer. 
+Analyze the code smell, and linter message step by step.
+
+Instructions:
+1. **Identify the Issue**  
+   - Restate the code smell or lint message in plain English.  
+   - Explain what it means in the context of software engineering.
+
+2. **Root Cause Analysis**  
+   - Describe why this issue occurs.  
+   - Point out the underlying coding practice or design flaw.
+
+3. **Impact Assessment**  
+   - Explain the potential risks (e.g., maintainability, readability, performance, security).  
+   - Clarify how severe the issue is.
+
+4. **Suggested Fix**  
+   - Provide a concise, actionable recommendation.  
+   - If relevant, show a short code snippet with the corrected approach.
+
+5. **Best Practice Note**  
+   - Mention a general guideline or principle (e.g., SOLID, DRY, naming conventions) that helps prevent similar issues.
+
+## Linter Result
+{linter_result}
+
+## Code Smell Result
+{code_smell_result}
+
+Output Format:
+- Use numbered steps for each lint message or code smell.  
+- Keep explanations simple but professional.  
+- Provide examples where helpful.   
+"""
diff --git a/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/skills/__init__.py b/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/skills/__init__.py
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..e69de29
diff --git a/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/skills_send_gui.py b/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/skills/skills_send_gui.py
similarity index 100%
rename from automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/skills_send_gui.py
rename to automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/extend_ai_gui/skills/skills_send_gui.py
diff --git a/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/menu/tools/tools_menu.py b/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/menu/tools/tools_menu.py
index b71ea7f..ea96aab 100644
--- a/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/menu/tools/tools_menu.py
+++ b/automation_ide/automation_editor_ui/menu/tools/tools_menu.py
@@ -12,7 +12,7 @@
 from automation_ide.automation_editor_ui.extend_ai_gui.prompt_edit_gui.cot_prompt_editor_widget import CoTPromptEditor
 from automation_ide.automation_editor_ui.extend_ai_gui.prompt_edit_gui.skills_prompt_editor_widget import \
     SkillPromptEditor
-from automation_ide.automation_editor_ui.extend_ai_gui.skills_send_gui import SkillsSendGUI
+from automation_ide.automation_editor_ui.extend_ai_gui.skills.skills_send_gui import SkillsSendGUI
 
 if TYPE_CHECKING:
     from automation_ide.automation_editor_ui.editor_main.main_ui import AutomationEditor
diff --git a/pyproject.toml b/pyproject.toml
index 37c7fc5..1f6f46b 100644
--- a/pyproject.toml
+++ b/pyproject.toml
@@ -6,7 +6,7 @@ build-backend = "setuptools.build_meta"
 
 [project]
 name = "automation_ide_dev"
-version = "1.0.3"
+version = "1.0.4"
 authors = [
     { name = "JE-Chen", email = "jechenmailman@gmail.com" },
 ]

From 28675e0898999a34c62bfdce0e504b42f8dfe8ef Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: JE-Chen <zenmailman@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 9 Mar 2026 14:16:42 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 2/3] Update stable version

Update stable version
---
 stable.toml => dev.toml | 11 ++++++-----
 pyproject.toml          |  9 ++++-----
 2 files changed, 10 insertions(+), 10 deletions(-)
 rename stable.toml => dev.toml (86%)

diff --git a/stable.toml b/dev.toml
similarity index 86%
rename from stable.toml
rename to dev.toml
index 9d6a392..1f6f46b 100644
--- a/stable.toml
+++ b/dev.toml
@@ -1,12 +1,12 @@
-# Rename to build stable version
-# This is stable version
+# Rename to dev version
+# This is dev version
 [build-system]
 requires = ["setuptools>=61.0"]
 build-backend = "setuptools.build_meta"
 
 [project]
-name = "automation_ide"
-version = "1.0.3"
+name = "automation_ide_dev"
+version = "1.0.4"
 authors = [
     { name = "JE-Chen", email = "jechenmailman@gmail.com" },
 ]
@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ description = "AutomationEditor for multi automation"
 requires-python = ">=3.10"
 license-files = ["LICENSE"]
 dependencies = [
-    "je-editor", "je_auto_control", "je_web_runner",
+    "je_editor_dev", "je_auto_control", "je_web_runner",
     "je_load_density", "je_api_testka", "je-mail-thunder",
     "automation-file", "PySide6==6.10.2", "test_pioneer", "paramiko"
 ]
@@ -35,5 +35,6 @@ Code = "https://github.com/Intergration-Automation-Testing/AutomationEditor"
 file = "README.md"
 content-type = "text/markdown"
 
+
 [tool.setuptools.packages]
 find = { namespaces = false }
diff --git a/pyproject.toml b/pyproject.toml
index 1f6f46b..225c070 100644
--- a/pyproject.toml
+++ b/pyproject.toml
@@ -1,11 +1,11 @@
-# Rename to dev version
-# This is dev version
+# Rename to build stable version
+# This is stable version
 [build-system]
 requires = ["setuptools>=61.0"]
 build-backend = "setuptools.build_meta"
 
 [project]
-name = "automation_ide_dev"
+name = "automation_ide"
 version = "1.0.4"
 authors = [
     { name = "JE-Chen", email = "jechenmailman@gmail.com" },
@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ description = "AutomationEditor for multi automation"
 requires-python = ">=3.10"
 license-files = ["LICENSE"]
 dependencies = [
-    "je_editor_dev", "je_auto_control", "je_web_runner",
+    "je-editor", "je_auto_control", "je_web_runner",
     "je_load_density", "je_api_testka", "je-mail-thunder",
     "automation-file", "PySide6==6.10.2", "test_pioneer", "paramiko"
 ]
@@ -35,6 +35,5 @@ Code = "https://github.com/Intergration-Automation-Testing/AutomationEditor"
 file = "README.md"
 content-type = "text/markdown"
 
-
 [tool.setuptools.packages]
 find = { namespaces = false }

From c4231a59326f9095dbd0ad63fd5b397f91d2b02a Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001
From: JE-Chen <zenmailman@gmail.com>
Date: Fri, 13 Mar 2026 18:26:37 +0800
Subject: [PATCH 3/3] Update both version

Update both version
---
 pyproject.toml          | 9 +++++----
 dev.toml => stable.toml | 9 ++++-----
 2 files changed, 9 insertions(+), 9 deletions(-)
 rename dev.toml => stable.toml (88%)

diff --git a/pyproject.toml b/pyproject.toml
index 225c070..e3e3fda 100644
--- a/pyproject.toml
+++ b/pyproject.toml
@@ -1,11 +1,11 @@
-# Rename to build stable version
-# This is stable version
+# Rename to dev version
+# This is dev version
 [build-system]
 requires = ["setuptools>=61.0"]
 build-backend = "setuptools.build_meta"
 
 [project]
-name = "automation_ide"
+name = "PyBreeze_dev"
 version = "1.0.4"
 authors = [
     { name = "JE-Chen", email = "jechenmailman@gmail.com" },
@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ description = "AutomationEditor for multi automation"
 requires-python = ">=3.10"
 license-files = ["LICENSE"]
 dependencies = [
-    "je-editor", "je_auto_control", "je_web_runner",
+    "je_editor_dev", "je_auto_control", "je_web_runner",
     "je_load_density", "je_api_testka", "je-mail-thunder",
     "automation-file", "PySide6==6.10.2", "test_pioneer", "paramiko"
 ]
@@ -35,5 +35,6 @@ Code = "https://github.com/Intergration-Automation-Testing/AutomationEditor"
 file = "README.md"
 content-type = "text/markdown"
 
+
 [tool.setuptools.packages]
 find = { namespaces = false }
diff --git a/dev.toml b/stable.toml
similarity index 88%
rename from dev.toml
rename to stable.toml
index 1f6f46b..f38781a 100644
--- a/dev.toml
+++ b/stable.toml
@@ -1,11 +1,11 @@
-# Rename to dev version
-# This is dev version
+# Rename to build stable version
+# This is stable version
 [build-system]
 requires = ["setuptools>=61.0"]
 build-backend = "setuptools.build_meta"
 
 [project]
-name = "automation_ide_dev"
+name = "PyBreeze"
 version = "1.0.4"
 authors = [
     { name = "JE-Chen", email = "jechenmailman@gmail.com" },
@@ -14,7 +14,7 @@ description = "AutomationEditor for multi automation"
 requires-python = ">=3.10"
 license-files = ["LICENSE"]
 dependencies = [
-    "je_editor_dev", "je_auto_control", "je_web_runner",
+    "je-editor", "je_auto_control", "je_web_runner",
     "je_load_density", "je_api_testka", "je-mail-thunder",
     "automation-file", "PySide6==6.10.2", "test_pioneer", "paramiko"
 ]
@@ -35,6 +35,5 @@ Code = "https://github.com/Intergration-Automation-Testing/AutomationEditor"
 file = "README.md"
 content-type = "text/markdown"
 
-
 [tool.setuptools.packages]
 find = { namespaces = false }