Skip to main content

audit-data-quality

Measure a dataset's completeness, validity, uniqueness, consistency, timeliness, lineage, and fitness for a named decision, then prioritize repair by impact. Use when reports conflict, a migration needs a baseline, model inputs are suspect, or someone asks whether data can be trusted.

소스 정보

저장소
protosphinx/sphinxstack
최근 소스 활동
2026년 7월 29일 13:55
감지된 SKILL.md 언어
영어
스타
3
포크
0

설치 방법

기본적으로 소스를 먼저 확인하는 Prompt가 선택됩니다. 직접 명령으로 전환하거나 로컬 사본을 다운로드할 수도 있습니다.

소스 파일 검토

설치 여부를 결정하기 전에 SKILL.md와 SkillsMP에 표시된 보조 파일을 읽어 보세요.

파일 탐색기
2 개 파일

SKILL.md 표시 중

SKILL.md
소스 지침 · 읽기 전용 미리보기
name
audit-data-quality
category
data
description
Measure a dataset's completeness, validity, uniqueness, consistency, timeliness, lineage, and fitness for a named decision, then prioritize repair by impact. Use when reports conflict, a migration needs a baseline, model inputs are suspect, or someone asks whether data can be trusted.
# audit-data-quality Judge data against its intended use and declared rules. Produce reproducible tests, quantify affected records, trace defects to their source, and distinguish safe repair from irreversible guesswork. ## Inputs - Name the dataset, owners, consumers, decisions, time window, privacy rules, and source systems. - Gather schemas, dictionaries, pipelines, reconciliation reports, known incidents, and representative records. - Work from approved copies or read-only access. ## Procedure 1. Define critical data elements and the decisions or workflows each supports. 2. Write measurable rules for schema, completeness, domain validity, uniqueness, relationship integrity, consistency, timeliness, distribution, and reconciliation. 3. Record lineage from source through transformations to outputs, including owners and refresh schedules. 4. Profile counts, nulls, distinct values, ranges, patterns, duplicates, ages, and distributions by relevant segment. 5. Run deterministic quality tests and save the query or script, parameters, execution time, and snapshot identifier. 6. Sample both passing and failing records to confirm each rule measures the intended defect. 7. Quantify severity by affected decisions, records, users, money, compliance, and recoverability. 8. Trace high-impact failures upstream and distinguish source defect, transformation bug, stale contract, or misunderstood rule. 9. Propose prevention, backfill, quarantine, correction, or acceptance. Define reconciliation and rollback before changing records. 10. Assign owners and thresholds, then publish a scorecard that does not hide serious slices in one average. 11. Re-run the same tests after repair and preserve baseline plus residual exceptions. ## Boundaries Do not overwrite ambiguous records to improve a score. Never move private data into an unapproved profiler or report row-level examples unnecessarily. A plausible value is not a verified correction. ## Done - A versioned rule set and reproducible report cover critical quality dimensions and named decisions - Defects are quantified by scope, impact, source, owner, and recoverability - Sample review confirms rules identify real failures rather than harmless variation - Repair or acceptance decisions include reconciliation evidence, residual exceptions, and prevention checks Then use clean-a-dataset for a bounded repair or ship-a-data-pipeline to prevent recurrence.
GitHub에서 보기