agentleFS
jasonmichaelbell78-creatorjasonmichaelbell78-creator/sonash-v0/.claude/skills/data-effectiveness-audit/SKILL.md

data-effectiveness-audit

Skill2 starsChanged 9 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub

Comprehensive audit of data system effectiveness — lifecycle scoring across Capture, Storage, Recall, and Action dimensions for all data systems in the project.

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

20 rules. About 0 are common, 11 are distinctive, and 9 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈11

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 9

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    After adding new JSONL files or data systems

    line 45
  2. Distinctive:

    When health score Data Effectiveness dimension drops

    line 46
  3. Very specific:

    When /alerts surfaces data staleness warnings

    line 47
  4. Distinctive:

    Check that data flows form closed loops: capture -> store -> recall -> act -> improve capture.

    line 147
  5. Distinctive:

    Verify all JSONL files have rotation policies (Storage >= 2).

    line 156
  6. Very specific:

    Read .claude/state/lifecycle-scores.jsonl for current scores.

    line 180
  7. Distinctive:

    Check staleness: if newest entry is > 7 days old, mark as stale.

    line 181
  8. Distinctive:

    If scores are stale or new systems found:

    line 191
  9. Very specific:

    Write updated scores to .claude/state/lifecycle-scores.jsonl.

    line 195
  10. Very specific:

    Run node scripts/generate-lifecycle-scores-md.js to regenerate dashboard.

    line 196
  11. Distinctive:

    Done when: All systems scored, dashboard regenerated.

    line 198
  12. Distinctive:

    Skip if: All scores are fresh (< 7 days) and no new systems.

    line 200
  13. Very specific:

    Defer: Create TDMS entry via /add-debt.

    line 239
  14. Distinctive:

    After 3+ similar low-severity findings: offer batch acknowledgment.

    line 244
  15. Very specific:

    Run node scripts/route-lifecycle-gaps.js — routes Action<2 gaps through learning-to-automation pipeline.

    line 255
  16. Very specific:

    Run node scripts/route-enforcement-gaps.js — routes CLAUDE.md enforcement gaps.

    line 257
  17. Very specific:

    Run node scripts/verify-enforcement.js — verify enforcement effectiveness.

    line 259
  18. Distinctive:

    Done when: All gap routing scripts executed and results shown.

    line 262
  19. Very specific:

    Write report to .claude/tmp/data-effectiveness-audit-report-{YYYY-MM-DD}.md.

    line 285
  20. Distinctive:

    Verify fixed systems now score >= 6/12.

    line 295

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 308,232 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
<!-- prettier-ignore-start -->

Document Version: 1.0 Last Updated: 2026-03-13 Status: ACTIVE

<!-- prettier-ignore-end -->

Data Effectiveness Audit

Systematic audit of all data systems to identify write-only data, broken feedback loops, and enforcement gaps. Uses lifecycle scoring (Capture/Storage/Recall/Action, 0-3 each, 0-12 total) to quantify effectiveness and route gaps through the learning-to-automation pipeline.

Invocation: /data-effectiveness-audit

Critical Rules (MUST follow)

  1. READ lifecycle-scores.jsonl first (MUST) — never generate findings without current data.
  2. Present findings interactively (MUST) — one system at a time, worst first, with user decisions.
  3. Use conversational Q&A for decisions (MUST) — NEVER use AskUserQuestion.
  4. Update scores after decisions (MUST) — write to lifecycle-scores.jsonl immediately.
  5. Regenerate dashboard after updates (MUST) — run node scripts/generate-lifecycle-scores-md.js.
  6. Route gaps through pipeline (MUST) — Action<2 gaps routed via scripts/route-lifecycle-gaps.js.
  7. Create TDMS entries (MUST) — for deferred findings via /add-debt.

When to Use

  • User explicitly invokes /data-effectiveness-audit
  • Periodic health check on data pipeline effectiveness
  • After adding new JSONL files or data systems
  • When health score Data Effectiveness dimension drops
  • When /alerts surfaces data staleness warnings

When NOT to Use

  • For individual file rotation — use scripts/rotate-jsonl.js
  • For learning routing — use scripts/lib/learning-router.js directly
  • For general health monitoring — use /health-ecosystem-audit
  • For code quality auditing — use /audit-code
  • Running all ecosystem audits — use /comprehensive-ecosystem-audit

Routing Guide

ConcernUse
Data system lifecycle scoring/data-effectiveness-audit
Health monitoring system audit/health-ecosystem-audit
Hook internals, pre-commit/hook-ecosystem-audit
PR review workflow/pr-ecosystem-audit
Session lifecycle/session-ecosystem-audit
Technical debt management/tdms-ecosystem-audit
All of the above/comprehensive-ecosystem-audit

Process Overview

WARM-UP    Orientation     -> Effort estimate, process overview
PHASE 1    Load & Score    -> Read lifecycle-scores.jsonl, check staleness
PHASE 2    Re-Score        -> Score all systems across 4 dimensions (if stale)
PHASE 3    Dashboard       -> Composite grades, domain breakdown (worst first)
PHASE 4    Walkthrough     -> Interactive finding-by-finding decisions
PHASE 5    Route Gaps      -> Run gap routing scripts
PHASE 6    Summary         -> Decision aggregate + remediation plan
PHASE 7    Verification    -> Re-run scoring to confirm improvements
PHASE 8    Closure         -> Retro, invocation tracking, artifact list

Warm-Up (MUST)

Data Effectiveness Audit
Phases: Load scores -> Re-score -> Dashboard -> Walkthrough -> Route gaps -> Summary
Estimated time: 15-25 min (depends on system count + finding severity)

Done when: User confirms proceed.


Audit Domains (8)

D1. Capture Completeness

Score systems on data capture quality (0-3):

ScoreMeaning
0No structured capture
1Ad-hoc/manual capture
2Systematic capture with schema
3Automated capture with validation

D2. Storage Health

Score systems on data storage (0-3):

ScoreMeaning
0No rotation or management
1Exists but unbounded
2Rotation policy applied
3Rotation + backup + versioned schema

D3. Consumer Coverage (Recall)

Score systems on data consumption (0-3):

ScoreMeaning
0Write-only (no consumer)
1One informational consumer
2Multiple active consumers
3Consumers trigger automated actions

D4. Enforcement (Action)

Score systems on automated enforcement (0-3):

ScoreMeaning
0No enforcement
1Alerting/informational
2Semi-automated (gates + manual)
3Fully automated (gates + auto-fix)

D5. Feedback Loop Closure

Check that data flows form closed loops: capture -> store -> recall -> act -> improve capture.

D6. Orphan Detection

Identify files with zero consumers (Recall = 0).

D7. Growth Management

Verify all JSONL files have rotation policies (Storage >= 2).

D8. Cross-System Integration

Count cross-skill data flows and identify isolated systems.


Scoring Rubric

ScoreGradeMeaning
10-12AExcellent — fully wired and automated
8-9BGood — most loops closed, minor gaps
6-7CAdequate — functional but gaps exist
4-5DPoor — significant gaps, action needed
0-3FCritical — write-only or broken

Threshold: Systems below 6/12 are flagged for immediate remediation.


Phase 1: Load & Score (MUST)

  1. Read .claude/state/lifecycle-scores.jsonl for current scores.
  2. Check staleness: if newest entry is > 7 days old, mark as stale.
  3. List all known data systems (JSONL files, state files, metrics).
  4. Identify any new systems not yet scored.

Done when: Current scores loaded and staleness assessed.


Phase 2: Re-Score (CONDITIONAL)

If scores are stale or new systems found:

  1. For each data system, score across all 4 dimensions (C/S/R/A).
  2. Compute total (0-12) and letter grade.
  3. Write updated scores to .claude/state/lifecycle-scores.jsonl.
  4. Run node scripts/generate-lifecycle-scores-md.js to regenerate dashboard.

Done when: All systems scored, dashboard regenerated.

Skip if: All scores are fresh (< 7 days) and no new systems.


Phase 3: Dashboard (MUST)

Present dashboard sorted by score ascending (worst first):

## Data Effectiveness Dashboard

| System | Capture | Storage | Recall | Action | Total | Grade |
|--------|---------|---------|--------|--------|-------|-------|
| ...    | 0-3     | 0-3     | 0-3    | 0-3    | 0-12  | A-F   |

Composite Score: X/12 (Grade)
Systems below threshold (< 6): N
Orphaned systems (Recall = 0): N
Unbounded growth (Storage < 2): N

Zero findings below threshold: Skip walkthrough, go to Phase 6. With findings: Begin walkthrough.


Phase 4: Finding-by-Finding Walkthrough (MUST)

Sort systems by total score ascending (worst first). For each system below threshold (< 6/12):

  1. Show current scores with dimension breakdown.
  2. Identify weakest dimension(s).
  3. Recommend specific remediation action.
  4. Get user decision.

Decision Options

  • Fix Now: Implement remediation in this session.
  • Defer: Create TDMS entry via /add-debt.
  • Skip: Acknowledge with justification.

Batch Shortcuts

After 3+ similar low-severity findings: offer batch acknowledgment.

Scope Explosion Guard

More than 15 systems below threshold: offer filtered review (F-grade only first, then D-grade).


Phase 5: Route Gaps (MUST)

  1. Run node scripts/route-lifecycle-gaps.js — routes Action<2 gaps through learning-to-automation pipeline.
  2. Run node scripts/route-enforcement-gaps.js — routes CLAUDE.md enforcement gaps.
  3. Run node scripts/verify-enforcement.js — verify enforcement effectiveness.
  4. Present routing results to user.

Done when: All gap routing scripts executed and results shown.


Phase 6: Summary & Actions (MUST)

## Audit Summary

- Systems audited: N
- Composite score: X/12 (Grade)
- Systems improved: N
- Systems deferred: N
- Systems skipped: N
- Gaps routed: N

### Remediation Plan
[Ordered list of deferred items with priority]

### Key Insights
[2-3 data-driven observations about system health trends]

Write report to .claude/tmp/data-effectiveness-audit-report-{YYYY-MM-DD}.md.


Phase 7: Verification (SHOULD)

Re-run scoring to confirm improvements:

  1. Regenerate lifecycle scores.
  2. Compare before/after composite score.
  3. Verify fixed systems now score >= 6/12.

Phase 8: Closure (MUST)

  1. Auto-learnings (MUST): 2-3 data-driven insights about system health.
  2. Invocation tracking (MUST):
    cd scripts/reviews && npx tsx write-invocation.ts --data '{"skill":"data-effectiveness-audit","type":"skill","success":true,"schema_version":1,"completeness":"stub","origin":{"type":"manual"},"context":{"score":SCORE,"grade":"GRADE"}}'
  3. Closure signal (MUST): List all artifacts created/modified.
  4. Cleanup (SHOULD): Remove any temporary files.

Key Scripts

ScriptPurpose
scripts/generate-lifecycle-scores-md.jsGenerate dashboard from JSONL
scripts/route-lifecycle-gaps.jsRoute Action<2 gaps
scripts/route-enforcement-gaps.jsRoute CLAUDE.md enforcement gaps
scripts/lib/learning-router.jsCore routing library
scripts/verify-enforcement.jsVerify enforcement effectiveness
scripts/ratchet-baselines.jsTighten violation baselines
scripts/rotate-jsonl.jsApply rotation policies

Output Artifacts

ArtifactPurpose
.claude/state/lifecycle-scores.jsonlUpdated scores
.planning/system-wide-standardization/learnings-effectiveness-audit/LIFECYCLE_SCORES.mdGenerated dashboard
.claude/state/learning-routes.jsonlRouting decisions
.claude/tmp/data-effectiveness-audit-report-{date}.mdSession report

Integration

  • Health Check: scripts/health/checkers/data-effectiveness.js (15% weight)
  • Alerts: /alerts checks velocity-regression, stale-planning, deferred-items
  • Session: session-end includes planning data + commit analytics

Guard Rails

  • Zero findings below threshold: Skip walkthrough, go to Summary.
  • Scope explosion: >15 systems below threshold -> offer filtered review.
  • Script failure: Report error, suggest manual scoring.
  • Disengagement: Save progress, show resume instructions.

Version History

VersionDateDescription
1.02026-03-13Initial creation from Data Effectiveness Audit plan

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.