analysis-workflow

Estrellas3

Forks1

Actualizado23 de julio de 2026 a las 22:15

Analyze, validate, debug, troubleshoot, critique, red-team, adversarial, or what-could-go-wrong questions. Not for PR/diff review; use code-review.

Instalación

Instalar con Codex o Claude Copia este prompt, pégalo en Codex, Claude u otro asistente, y deja que revise la página de la skill y la instale por ti.

Fuente

ilude

ilude/dotfiles

Abrir repositorio de GitHub Ver repositorios del creador

Descarga

Ocupaciones relacionadasSOC

Basado en la clasificación ocupacional SOC

Desarrolladores de softwareOcupaciones informáticas y matemáticas·SOC 15-1252

Explorador de archivos

4 archivos

SKILL.md

readonly

name	analysis-workflow
description	Analyze, validate, debug, troubleshoot, critique, red-team, adversarial, or what-could-go-wrong questions. Not for PR/diff review; use code-review.

Analysis Workflow

Boundary

Need	Use
Debugging, validation, root-cause analysis, red-team critique	`analysis-workflow`
Reviewing a diff/branch/PR/commit for findings	`code-review`
Logs, metrics, traces, alerts, SLOs	`logging-observability`
Failed live mutation	Follow the active repository incident policy

Core Principle

Structured evidence beats analysis theater. Form hypotheses, test them, and separate observed facts from guesses.

Practical Steps

State the question or failure mode.
Gather direct evidence before proposing fixes.
List plausible hypotheses and what would falsify each.
Run the cheapest decisive check first.
Distinguish confirmed facts, likely causes, and unknowns.
Recommend the smallest next action backed by evidence.

Debugging Checklist

What changed recently?
Can the issue be reproduced?
What exact input/state triggers it?
Which layer first diverges from expected behavior?
What evidence would disprove the leading theory?

Anti-Patterns

Producing long critique without checking evidence.
Treating correlation as cause.
Jumping to broad refactors before isolating the fault.
Reporting risks without probability, impact, or mitigation.
Retrying without evidence that distinguishes a new hypothesis.

Más de este repositorio

mismo repositorio

pi-extension

ilude/dotfiles

Pi extensions and tool policy: extensions/*.ts, hooks, registerTool, promptGuidelines, registerCommand, footer/status UI, tool_result, session hooks, or subprocesses. Not for slash-command placement; use pi-command.

2026-08-023

docs

ilude/dotfiles

README, CHANGELOG, docs/, RFCs, ADRs, guides, or Markdown structure. Not for prose cleanup or archival work.

2026-07-273

no-ai-slop

ilude/dotfiles

Prose cleanup for filler, hype, vague claims, repetition, detection tells, or uncited specifics. Not for Markdown architecture or archival work.

2026-07-273

planning

ilude/dotfiles

Requirements, user stories, acceptance/verification criteria, or testable outcomes. Not for PRD drafting (/prd) or Pi /goal prompts.

2026-07-273

prd

ilude/dotfiles

Use for /prd-it or to draft, refine, or review a Product Requirements Document. Not for acceptance criteria, planning, or Pi /goal prompts.

2026-07-273

pi-log-analytics

ilude/dotfiles

Pi session, trace, metrics, routing, workflow-friction, workflow-telemetry, usage, or local JSONL analysis with DuckDB. Use for aggregating or correlating Pi runtime logs. Not for adding telemetry, generic SQL/database design, or non-Pi logs.

2026-07-273

name	analysis-workflow
description	Analyze, validate, debug, troubleshoot, critique, red-team, adversarial, or what-could-go-wrong questions. Not for PR/diff review; use code-review.

Analysis Workflow

Boundary

Need	Use
Debugging, validation, root-cause analysis, red-team critique	`analysis-workflow`
Reviewing a diff/branch/PR/commit for findings	`code-review`
Logs, metrics, traces, alerts, SLOs	`logging-observability`
Failed live mutation	Follow the active repository incident policy

Core Principle

Structured evidence beats analysis theater. Form hypotheses, test them, and separate observed facts from guesses.

Practical Steps

State the question or failure mode.
Gather direct evidence before proposing fixes.
List plausible hypotheses and what would falsify each.
Run the cheapest decisive check first.
Distinguish confirmed facts, likely causes, and unknowns.
Recommend the smallest next action backed by evidence.

Debugging Checklist

What changed recently?
Can the issue be reproduced?
What exact input/state triggers it?
Which layer first diverges from expected behavior?
What evidence would disprove the leading theory?

Anti-Patterns

Producing long critique without checking evidence.
Treating correlation as cause.
Jumping to broad refactors before isolating the fault.
Reporting risks without probability, impact, or mitigation.
Retrying without evidence that distinguishes a new hypothesis.