agentleFS
asgard-ai-platformasgard-ai-platform/skills/algo-risk-credit/SKILL.md

algo-risk-credit

Skill238 starsChanged 6 months agoMITView on GitHub

Build credit scoring models to predict default probability from borrower characteristics. Use this skill when the user needs to assess creditworthiness, build a credit scorecard, or evaluate lending risk — even if they say 'predict default risk', 'credit scoring', or 'loan approval model'.

1 other project uses a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

1 rule. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈1

    Distinctive · estimate

    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:

    Vintage analysis: Default rates vary by economic conditions.

    line 83

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “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

Credit Scoring Model

Overview

Credit scoring models predict the probability of default (PD) from borrower characteristics using logistic regression or gradient boosting. Output: a score (300-850 range) or PD (0-1). Used for loan approval, pricing, and portfolio risk management.

When to Use

Trigger conditions:

  • Building a scorecard for loan/credit approval decisions
  • Predicting default probability for risk-based pricing
  • Evaluating existing credit models for discriminatory power

When NOT to use:

  • For corporate bankruptcy prediction (use Altman Z-Score)
  • For market risk measurement (use VaR)

Algorithm

IRON LAW: A Credit Model Must Discriminate AND Be Calibrated
Discrimination (AUC): correctly ranking good vs bad borrowers.
Calibration: predicted PD matches actual default rates.
A model with AUC=0.85 but predicted PD 2x actual default rate will
cause systematic over/under-pricing. Need BOTH properties.

Phase 1: Input Validation

Collect: borrower features (income, debt ratio, credit history length, delinquency count, utilization), outcome variable (default within 12-24 months). Handle: missing values, class imbalance (typically 2-5% default rate). Gate: Sufficient defaults (300+ events), features available at decision time.

Phase 2: Core Algorithm

  1. Feature engineering: WOE (Weight of Evidence) binning for logistic regression, or direct encoding for GBDT
  2. Train model: logistic regression (interpretable, regulatory-preferred) or GBDT (higher accuracy)
  3. Calibrate: Platt scaling on holdout, ensure predicted PD matches actual default rate by decile
  4. Convert to score: Score = offset + factor × log(odds), scaled to 300-850 range

Phase 3: Verification

Evaluate: AUC (>0.70 acceptable, >0.80 good), KS statistic, Gini coefficient. Population stability index (PSI) for monitoring drift. Gate: AUC > 0.70, calibration acceptable, no discriminatory bias in protected attributes.

Phase 4: Output

Return score, PD, and key risk drivers.

Output Format

{
  "score": 680,
  "pd": 0.035,
  "risk_grade": "B",
  "top_risk_factors": [{"factor": "high_utilization", "impact": -45}, {"factor": "short_history", "impact": -30}],
  "metadata": {"model": "logistic_regression", "auc": 0.78, "vintage": "2024-Q3"}
}

Examples

Sample I/O

Input: Borrower: income=$60K, DTI=35%, 5yr credit history, 0 delinquencies, 60% utilization Expected: Score ~680, PD ~3.5%, Grade B (some risk from high utilization)

Edge Cases

InputExpectedWhy
No credit history (thin file)High uncertainty, default to conservativeInsufficient data for scoring
All features identicalSame score regardless of outcomeModel can't differentiate — need more features
Major economy shiftPSI > 0.25, model needs recalibrationPopulation has shifted from training distribution

Gotchas

  • Reject inference: Training data only includes approved applicants. Rejected applicants' outcomes are unknown, creating selection bias. Use reject inference techniques.
  • Fair lending: Models must not discriminate by protected attributes (race, gender, age). Even proxy variables (zip code ≈ race) can create disparate impact. Test with fairness metrics.
  • Through-the-door vs on-the-books: TTD samples include all applicants; OTB only approved ones. Model purpose determines which sample to use.
  • Vintage analysis: Default rates vary by economic conditions. A 2019-trained model may not predict well in a recession. Track model performance by vintage.
  • Regulatory requirements: Financial regulators (Basel, OCC, FDIC) have specific requirements for model validation, documentation, and fair lending testing.

References

  • For WOE binning methodology, see references/woe-binning.md
  • For reject inference techniques, see references/reject-inference.md

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.