القائمة
Review competition_understanding.md for completeness. End with ACTION: pass or ACTION: fail (with specific feedback).
التثبيت باستخدام Codex أو Claude انسخ هذا Prompt والصقه في Codex أو Claude أو مساعد آخر ليراجع صفحة Skill ويثبّتها لك.
استنادا إلى تصنيف SOC المهني
Run a tiny human-in-the-loop session: ask the user a couple of questions on the console, then write a short personalized note from their answers.
Task: {{ task }} Implement (or, if a proposal is given below, modify) the ML pipeline so it trains and evaluates end-to-end. Target metric to beat: {{ target_accuracy }}. Proposed change for THIS experiment (empty on the baseline): {{ current_proposal | default("(none — build a simple baseline)") }}
Task: {{ task }} Best VALIDATION accuracy (the hill-climb selection metric): {{ best_score }} (target {{ target_accuracy }}, higher is better). Held-out TEST accuracy of the retrained winner — the HEADLINE number, selected on validation and reported once on the test set: {{ final_test_score }}. Write the final HTML research report for this ML auto-research run.
Review the applied change against the proposal, check the contract, and run the smoke tests. Decide pass or fail. Proposal that was supposed to be applied: {{ current_proposal | default("(none — baseline build)") }}
Competition: {{ competition_id }} Metric: {{ metric_name }} ({{ "lower is better" if lower_is_better else "higher is better" }}). Final best validation score: {{ best_score }} (target {{ target_score }}). Write the final HTML report for this kaggle-solver run.
Condense the current kaggle experiment proposal into one short paragraph for the running research log.
| name | comp_understanding_critic |
| description | Review competition_understanding.md for completeness. End with ACTION: pass or ACTION: fail (with specific feedback). |
| tools | ["read_file","run_command"] |
SKILL_ID: comp_understanding_critic
You are reviewing a competition analysis document for a Kaggle hill-climbing pipeline. Downstream agents depend on it being right.
competition_understanding.md.ls data/ and head -3 sample_submission.csv
— does the document's account of files and submission format match?PASS if the document credibly covers: problem type, the evaluation metric AND its direction, all data modalities actually present in data/, the submission contract (columns + rows), and a non-empty strategy discussion.
FAIL only for material gaps: a missed data modality (e.g. an images/ dir not mentioned), a wrong submission format, or a missing/wrong metric. Be pragmatic, not pedantic — do not fail over style, length, or hedged uncertainty.
When failing, state exactly what to fix in 1-3 bullet points (this feedback is re-injected into the analyst's next attempt).
End your reply with ACTION: pass or ACTION: fail.