agentleFS
ai-analyst-labai-analyst-lab/ai-analyst/.claude/skills/reliability/SKILL.md

reliability

Skill304 starsChanged 2 months agoMITView on GitHub

Run one analytics task through several fresh trials to measure what repeats and what varies. Use for reliability, repeatability, variance, or repeated-run requests. This measures stability, not correctness.

8 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

6 rules. 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 7 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 6

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 0

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Use five fresh trials unless the user chooses another count.

    line 17
  2. Distinctive:

    Use the repository's deterministic reliability runner.

    line 20
  3. Distinctive:

    Run the reliability command as one foreground task.

    line 26
  4. Distinctive:

    If the current system already contains a reviewed definition for the question, report that fact.

    line 30
  5. Distinctive:

    every normalized result beside its raw form.

    line 41
  6. Distinctive:

    If the trials vary, locate the source before proposing a fix.

    line 47

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 7 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Reliability

What this answers

Does this named system configuration behave consistently on this task?

It does not answer whether the result is correct. A wrong analysis can repeat perfectly.

Run the evaluation

  1. Record the task, model, active data, available tools, system fingerprint, and the tolerance that matters for the decision.
  2. Use five fresh trials unless the user chooses another count. The trials must not share answers.
  3. Preserve completed, failed, blocked, error, and unparseable trials separately.
  4. Save the raw output from every trial.
  5. Use the repository's deterministic reliability runner. It creates five independent workspaces, uses the active data source, preserves every result, and calculates the comparison.
  6. Report exact agreement and agreement within the named tolerance separately.
  7. State what changed if this is a comparison with an earlier run.

The deterministic CLI is available at python3 -m helpers.evals.cli run-reliability. Use it when the task can be executed noninteractively. For the standard run, explicitly pass --trials 5 --parallelism 5 --model claude-opus-4-6. Add --allow-code when the task requires a query. Do not lower parallelism preemptively or infer an account limit. Lower it only after the five-way run returns an actual concurrency or rate-limit error, and tell the user what failed before retrying.

Run the reliability command as one foreground task. Read its progress messages as trials finish. Do not create separate sleep commands or polling shells merely to wait for it.

The runner automatically gives each trial a clean view of the current analytical system. It excludes old outputs, test fixtures, future course examples, and inactive dataset packages. Connection credentials remain outside the workspace and are passed through the process environment. Do not ask the user to manage excluded paths or trial workspaces.

If the current system already contains a reviewed definition for the question, report that fact. Do not hide current context merely to manufacture variation.

For a separate local context store, pass its path with --context-store. The runner saves a snapshot under the run's context-snapshot/ directory and installs the same contents in each trial. This does not change the project's active context configuration. Without an override, a configured source: path store is used automatically; legacy Git-cache mode must first be connected as a visible local path. Do not silently substitute local definitions if that source cannot be read.

Each trial is instructed to inspect the guide catalog and load relevant reviewed guides. Inspect trials/<number>/trace/context_loads_<analysis_id>.jsonl to see the full guide text loaded, and compare it with the query logs to check application. The snapshot proves which files were available, not that a guide was used. input-inventory.json records trial inputs and response.json preserves the response and captured tool events. Definition labels alone do not establish whether two attempts used the same calculation.

Report

Lead with:

  • how many trials succeeded;
  • every normalized result beside its raw form;
  • exact agreement;
  • tolerance-based agreement;
  • what definitions or methods changed; and
  • what the evidence does not establish.

If the trials vary, locate the source before proposing a fix. If one definition or context change is made, freeze everything else and rerun the same task.

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.