analyze-survey-ai-preview
Skill2 starsChanged 2 months agoMITView on GitHub
Create or rebuild the staged Viva Glint survey report with AI-generated People Science summaries. Use only when the user explicitly asks for the AI summary preview, staging experience, or experimental summarized report.
In this repository6 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- website/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- website/packages/data-visuals/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- website/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- analyze-surveySkill
- people-science-knowledge-vaultSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
8 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 6 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈2
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
6
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 9
Add the staged AI People Science summary experience to the shared analyze-survey report pipeline.
- Very specific: line 15
Use a dedicated output directory whose name clearly includes ai-preview.
- Very specific: line 16
Never add summaries to a standard analyze-survey output unless the user explicitly asks to convert that output into a preview.
- Distinctive: line 18
Keep respondent-level data local and outside the share ZIP.
- Very specific: line 22
If no completed analysis exists, follow ../analyze-survey/SKILL.md and run scripts/analyze_survey_export.py with --summary-mode off.
- Very specific: line 24
Follow ../analyze-survey/references/interpretation.md to establish QA readiness and apply the interpretation process and guardrails.
- Very specific: line 28
Use people-science-knowledge-vault to retrieve relevant externally published article bodies.
- Distinctive: line 49
Use the shared report contract and narrative schema rather than maintaining a second summary specification here.
≈ “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.
Files
Analyze Survey AI Preview
Add the staged AI People Science summary experience to the shared
analyze-survey report pipeline. Do not duplicate the analysis runner, report
builder, golden report, schemas, or source index.
Isolation
- Use a dedicated output directory whose name clearly includes
ai-preview. - Never add summaries to a standard
analyze-surveyoutput unless the user explicitly asks to convert that output into a preview. - Keep respondent-level data local and outside the share ZIP.
Workflow
- If no completed analysis exists, follow
../analyze-survey/SKILL.mdand runscripts/analyze_survey_export.pywith--summary-mode off. - Follow
../analyze-survey/references/interpretation.mdto establish QA readiness and apply the interpretation process and guardrails. - Inspect
people-science-summary-context.jsonand the AI-summary modes in../analyze-survey/references/interactive-report-contract.md. - Use
people-science-knowledge-vaultto retrieve relevant externally published article bodies. - Write
people-science-summaries.jsonusing../analyze-survey/references/people-science-summaries.schema.json. Include all six tabs. - Rebuild the report:
python scripts/build_interactive_report.py \
--config <output-directory>/_input/analysis-config.json \
--output-dir <output-directory> \
--summary-mode required- Confirm all six narrative objects are embedded, the manifest records
summary_modeasrequired, and the share ZIP contains the summary file. Tab-level AI cards remain hidden as specified in the report contract. - Open the HTML report before finishing.
Summary contract
Use the shared report contract and narrative schema rather than maintaining a second summary specification here.
Promotion
This skill is a staging entry point. When the preview is approved, promote the
experience by changing the default summary mode in the shared pipeline and
folding these orchestration instructions into analyze-survey; do not replace
the pipeline with copied code.
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
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.

