Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Provides Qwen Coder CLI delegation workflows for coding tasks using Qwen2.5-Coder and QwQ models, including English prompt formulation, execution flags, and safe result handling. Use when the user explicitly asks to use Qwen for tasks such as code generation, refactoring, debugging, or architectural analysis. Triggers on "use qwen", "use qwen coder", "delegate to qwen", "ask qwen", "second opinion from qwen", "qwen opinion", "continue with qwen", "qwen session".
.claude/skills/giuseppe-trisciuoglio-qwen-coder/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-06 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 602% | 0% |
| case-07 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 58% | 0% |
| case-14 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 115% | 0% |
| case-16 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 221% | 0% |
| case-21 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 75% | 0% |
Delegate selected tasks from Claude Code to Qwen Coder CLI using non-interactive commands, explicit model selection, safe permission flags, and shareable outputs.
This skill standardizes delegation to Qwen Coder CLI (qwen) for cases where Qwen's specific strengths may benefit the task. It covers:
-p / --prompt-m / --model--approval-mode)-c / --continue or -r / --resumetext, json, stream-json)Use this skill only when delegation to Qwen Coder is explicitly requested or clearly beneficial.
Use this skill when:
Trigger phrases:
Verify tool availability and authentication before delegation:
bash# CLI availability qwen --version # Authentication status qwen auth status
If qwen is unavailable, inform the user and stop execution until Qwen Coder CLI is installed. If authentication is invalid, provide authentication setup instructions and stop execution.
references/cli-command-reference.mdBefore running Qwen Coder:
If scope is ambiguous, ask for clarification first.
All delegated prompts to Qwen Coder CLI must be in English.
Build a precise English prompt from the user request.
Prompt quality checklist:
Prompt template:
textTask: <clear objective> Context: <project/module/files> Constraints: <do/don't constraints> Expected output: <format + depth> Validation: <tests/checks to run or explain>
Preferred baseline command:
bashqwen -p "<english-prompt>"
Supported options:
-m, --model <model-id> for model selection (default: qwen2.5-coder)--approval-mode <plan|default|auto_edit|yolo> for safety control-c, --continue <session-id> to continue previous session-r, --resume <session-id> as alias for continue-o, --output-format <text|json|stream-json> for output formatApproval modes:
| Mode | Behavior | Recommended For | |------|----------|-----------------| | plan | Read-only analysis, no file modifications | Analysis-only tasks, security reviews | | default | Requires confirmation before modifications | General coding tasks | | auto_edit | Auto-approves edit operations | Trusted modifications with oversight | | yolo | Approves all operations without confirmation | Experimental tasks (explicit user request only) |
Safety guidance:
--approval-mode plan for read-only analysis--approval-mode default for general tasks--yolo for explicit user requests onlyRun the selected command via Bash and capture stdout/stderr.
Examples:
bash# Default non-interactive delegation qwen -p "Analyze this code and suggest refactoring improvements." # Explicit model and approval mode qwen -p "Review authentication module for security issues with fixes." -m qwq --approval-mode plan # Continue previous session qwen -c <session-id> -p "Continue the refactoring from the previous session." # Structured output for automation qwen -p "Summarize key technical debt items as JSON array." --output-format json
This section covers how to present Qwen Coder output and when to request user confirmation.
When reporting Qwen Coder output:
Before applying any suggested modifications:
Exception: In --approval-mode yolo with explicit user request, changes may proceed automatically. Still inform the user of what was done.
Each delegation result shall include the following metadata:
| Field | Description | |-------|-------------| | Task summary | What was delegated to Qwen Coder | | Command | The qwen command executed (without sensitive parameters) | | Model | Which model was used (for example qwen2.5-coder, qwq) | | Approval mode | The approval mode applied (plan, default, auto_edit, yolo) | | Key findings | Observations and results from Qwen Coder | | Suggested next actions | Recommended follow-up steps (if applicable) |
Use this structure when returning delegated results:
markdown## Qwen Coder Delegation Result ### Task [delegated task summary] ### Command `qwen ...` ### Key Findings - Finding 1 - Finding 2 ### Suggested Next Actions 1. Action 1 2. Action 2 ### Notes - Output language from Qwen: English - Requires user approval before applying code changes
Input:
textAnalyze the authentication module and identify security vulnerabilities.
Command:
bashqwen -p "Analyze the authentication module for security vulnerabilities. Report only high-confidence issues with severity, file paths, and remediation steps." -m qwq --approval-mode plan
Expected behavior:
textReturns a structured analysis with high-confidence security findings, including severity ratings and specific remediation recommendations.
Input:
textRefactor the payment service to reduce code duplication while keeping the public API unchanged.
Command:
bashqwen -p "Refactor the payment service in src/services/payment.ts to reduce duplication. Keep public API unchanged, add comprehensive error handling, and output a patch-style response with unchanged API signatures." -m qwen2.5-coder --approval-mode default
Expected behavior:
textProposes concrete code changes (patch-style), extracts duplication into shared helpers, and maintains original API contracts.
Input:
textGenerate documentation for the UserService class including usage examples.
Command:
bashqwen -p "Generate comprehensive documentation for the UserService class. Include: class purpose, public methods with parameters, usage examples, and error handling patterns. Format as markdown." -m qwen2.5-coder --approval-mode plan
Expected behavior:
textReturns markdown-formatted documentation with JSDoc-style comments, method signatures, and practical usage examples.
Input:
textGenerate a REST API endpoint for CRUD operations on items.
Command:
bashqwen -p "Generate a production-ready REST API endpoint for CRUD operations on items. Include input validation, error handling, and unit tests. Use Express.js framework." -m qwen2.5-coder --approval-mode auto_edit
Expected behavior:
textGenerates complete, runnable code for POST/GET/PUT/DELETE endpoints with proper middleware, validation, and test scaffolding.
Input:
textContinue the previous Qwen session to add test coverage to the refactored code.
Command:
bashqwen -c <session-id> -p "Continue from the previous session. Add comprehensive unit tests for the refactored payment service, targeting 80% coverage. Include mocks for external dependencies." -m qwen2.5-coder --approval-mode default
Expected behavior:
textResumes the previous session context and continues work, adding test files with appropriate mocks and assertions.
Input:
textCompare Qwen2.5-Coder and QwQ outputs for the same refactoring task.
Command:
bash# First run with Qwen2.5-Coder qwen -p "Refactor the string utility module for better maintainability." -m qwen2.5-coder --approval-mode plan --output-format text # Then run with QwQ for comparison qwen -p "Refactor the string utility module for better maintainability." -m qwq --approval-mode plan --output-format text
Expected behavior:
textProvides side-by-side comparison: Qwen2.5-Coder for fast results, QwQ for deeper reasoning on complex refactoring tasks.
Input:
textList the top 5 refactoring opportunities as JSON for our tracking system.
Command:
bashqwen -p "Analyze this codebase and return the top 5 refactoring opportunities as a JSON array. Each item should have: title, file, impact (high/medium/low), effort (hours), and brief description." -m qwen2.5-coder --output-format json
Expected behavior:
textReturns valid JSON array with 5 refactoring items, parseable for integration with project management tools.
| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-10 | fail→fail | 6,923 | 3,123 | -55% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,010 | 2,834 | +181% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-01 | fail→fail | 8,509 | 9,129 | +7% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,064 | 3,441 | +223% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | fail→fail | 15,611 | 6,113 | -61% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,961 | 2,803 | -5% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | fail→fail | 14,668 | 7,730 | -47% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,624 | 2,773 | +6% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | pass→fail | 5,063 | 7,097 | +40% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 839 | 2,871 | +242% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | pass→fail | 3,339 | 8,752 | +162% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 404 | 2,994 | +641% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | fail→fail | 7,407 | 6,312 | -15% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,538 | 2,870 | +87% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | fail→pass | 3,509 | 2,364 | -33% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 402 | 2,822 | +602% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | fail→pass | 10,622 | 2,285 | -78% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,838 | 2,906 | +58% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | fail→fail | 7,792 | 12,410 | +59% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,169 | 2,907 | +149% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | fail→fail | 12,697 | 10,716 | -16% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,444 | 3,596 | +149% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | fail→fail | 6,833 | 6,900 | +1% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 946 | 2,917 | +208% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | fail→fail | 11,480 | 6,709 | -42% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,832 | 2,889 | +58% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | fail→pass | 10,409 | 7,036 | -32% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,722 | 3,707 | +115% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | fail→fail | 11,360 | 5,787 | -49% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,897 | 2,739 | +44% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | fail→pass | 5,673 | 2,921 | -49% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 929 | 2,984 | +221% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | pass→pass | 9,953 | 3,776 | -62% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,724 | 3,134 | +82% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | pass→pass | 10,493 | 7,864 | -25% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,748 | 3,925 | +125% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | fail→fail | 11,426 | 6,514 | -43% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,841 | 2,802 | +52% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | pass→pass | 11,606 | 7,047 | -39% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,806 | 3,680 | +104% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | fail→pass | 10,569 | 3,168 | -70% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,750 | 3,061 | +75% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | pass→pass | 12,587 | 4,022 | -68% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,135 | 2,939 | +38% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-23 | pass→fail | 4,611 | 8,336 | +81% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 662 | 2,922 | +341% | 0 | 0 | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 23 cases were attempted, and 15 counted toward the lift figure. The other 8 produced results that are not comparable between the two arms, so they are excluded from the headline rather than averaged into it. The headline lift of +9 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 15 comparable cases. 3 cases got worse with the skill loaded, and they are included in that figure.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.