pipeline-health-report
Skill4 starsChanged 6 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Use when checking data pipeline health, workflow status, Maestro failures, or generating a daily pipeline report. Trigger phrases: pipeline health, workflow status, data pipeline report, maestro health, pipeline check, are my workflows healthy.
In this repository57 other files it gives its agents.
- autopilotSkill
- build-python-librarySkill
- build-temporalSkill
- canon-design-reviewSkill
- canon-pr-reviewSkill
- canon-reviewSkill
- ccr-modelsSkill
- ccr-runSkill
- chartSkill
- ci-health-reportSkill
- code-quality-trendsSkill
- competitive-matrixSkill
- councilSkill
- create-skillSkill
- deep-debug-ensemble-v1Skill
- deep-debugSkill
- deep-designSkill
- deep-ideaSkill
- deep-planSkill
- deep-qa-ensemble-v1Skill
- deep-qaSkill
- deep-researchSkill
- dependency-auditSkill
- deploy-status-reportSkill
- develop-board-gameSkill
- diagramSkill
- docxSkill
- dora-lite-reportSkill
- find-skillSkill
- flaky-test-diagnoserSkill
- gap-finderSkill
- gen-crash-testSkill
- gen-smokeSkill
- goal-managerSkill
- init-github-repoSkill
- loop-until-doneSkill
- magic-fetchSkill
- ml-pipeline-reportSkill
- monitorSkill
- napSkill
- platform-friction-detectorSkill
- pptxSkill
- prod-readinessSkill
- prompt-clash-ensembleSkill
- prompt-clashSkill
- retrospectSkill
- slack-digestSkill
- slidesSkill
- specSkill
- sprint-retroSkill
- tableSkill
- team-temporalSkill
- timelineSkill
- update-stop-gateSkill
- user-activity-reportSkill
- vc-gauntletSkill
- xlsxSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
14 rules. About 0 are common, 10 are distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈10
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
4
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 43
Discover workflows: Use the configured scope to find workflows:
- Very specific: line 44
If workflow_ids is set: skip search, check each ID directly via get_latest_instance
- Very specific: line 45
If workflow_id_pattern is set: call search_workflows with workflow_id_pattern and cluster=prod
- Very specific: line 47
If none is set and no config.json: ask the user once, then save their answer to config.json for future runs
- Very specific: line 77
Deliver as HTML: Follow the shared HTML delivery pattern in _shared/html-delivery.md.
- Distinctive: line 84
Deterministic math first, LLM narrates only: All classification (severity, flaky vs broken, pass/fail) must be computed deterministically …
- Distinctive: line 85
Pair metrics with counter-metrics: Never report velocity without stability.
- Distinctive: line 89
Always cluster=prod: Every Kragle MCP call passes cluster="prod" unless the user explicitly says sandbox.
- Distinctive: line 90
Never skip get_instance_failures: Every FAILED workflow gets a get_instance_failures call.
- Distinctive: line 91
Check ALL workflows, not a sample: If search_workflows returns 50 results and you set limit=50, consider whether there are more.
- Distinctive: line 93
Include links: Every failed or in-progress workflow includes its instance_link from the API response.
- Distinctive: line 94
"All clear" is still a report: When everything succeeded, produce the full report structure with counts and timestamps.
- Distinctive: line 95
No invented data: Every number in the report comes from a Kragle API response.
- Distinctive: line 119
Before delivering the report, verify:
≈ “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
Pipeline Health Report
Produce an actionable daily health report for Maestro data workflows using Kragle MCP tools.
Configuration
See _shared/report-config.md for the standard config resolution pattern.
Config schema (~/.claude/skills/pipeline-health-report/config.json):
owner: workflow owner pattern string (e.g.,data.eng.myteam)workflow_id_pattern: wildcard pattern string (e.g.,DSE.BILLING.*)workflow_ids: list of explicit workflow ID stringscluster:"prod"or"sandbox"(default:"prod")limit: max workflows to check (default: 50)
Required scope: at least one of owner, workflow_id_pattern, or workflow_ids.
Arguments
Parse from user input, falling back to config.json:
- owner: workflow owner pattern — e.g.
data.eng.* - workflow_id_pattern: wildcard pattern — e.g.
DSE.BILLING.* - workflow_ids: explicit list of workflow IDs to check
- cluster:
prod|sandbox(default: prod — never default to sandbox for health reports) - limit: max workflows to check (default: 50)
Workflow
- Discover workflows. Use the configured scope to find workflows:
- If
workflow_idsis set: skip search, check each ID directly viaget_latest_instance - If
workflow_id_patternis set: callsearch_workflowswithworkflow_id_patternand cluster=prod - If
owneris set: callsearch_workflowswithownerand cluster=prod - If none is set and no config.json: ask the user once, then save their answer to config.json for future runs
- If
- Check every workflow. For EACH workflow returned, call
get_latest_instancewith cluster=prod. Record status: SUCCEEDED, FAILED, IN_PROGRESS, or no recent instance. - Drill into failures. For every FAILED instance, call
get_instance_failureswith cluster=prod. Extract: step_id, attempt number, status, and instance link. This step is MANDATORY — never report a failure without step-level detail. - Check running durations. For every IN_PROGRESS instance, call
get_instance_summarywith cluster=prod. Flag any instance running longer than 2 hours as "long-running." - Generate report. Output markdown with these sections in order:
## Pipeline Health Report — {date}
Cluster: {cluster} | Owner filter: {owner or "all"} | Workflows checked: {N}
### Summary
- Failed: {count} | In Progress: {count} | Succeeded: {count} | No Recent Run: {count}
### Failed Workflows
(For each: workflow_id, failed step, error summary, instance link)
### Long-Running Workflows
(For each: workflow_id, duration so far, instance link)
### In Progress
(Compact list: workflow_id, start time)
### Recently Succeeded
(Compact table: workflow_id, last success time)- Deliver as HTML. Follow the shared HTML delivery pattern in
_shared/html-delivery.md. Report name:pipeline-health. TLDR includes workflows checked, failure count, and long-running instances. - Terminate. Report is complete when all sections are populated (even if a section says "None").
Design Principles
- Team-level only. Aggregate to team level — it is the right granularity for a periodic digest. Individual-level detail (commits per person, PR count per author) is too noisy for a team report.
- Deterministic math first, LLM narrates only. All classification (severity, flaky vs broken, pass/fail) must be computed deterministically from data. The LLM writes prose around the numbers but never assigns severity or makes classification judgments.
- Pair metrics with counter-metrics. Never report velocity without stability. If showing deploy frequency, also show change failure rate. If showing PR throughput, also show rework rate.
Golden Rules
- Always cluster=prod. Every Kragle MCP call passes cluster="prod" unless the user explicitly says sandbox. Sandbox workflows are tests, not production health.
- Never skip get_instance_failures. Every FAILED workflow gets a get_instance_failures call. "Workflow X failed" without step detail is useless.
- Check ALL workflows, not a sample. If search_workflows returns 50 results and you set limit=50, consider whether there are more. Increase limit or paginate.
- Failures first. Report sections are ordered by severity. Failures at top, succeeded at bottom.
- Include links. Every failed or in-progress workflow includes its instance_link from the API response. The reader must be able to click through without additional lookups.
- "All clear" is still a report. When everything succeeded, produce the full report structure with counts and timestamps. One sentence is not a report.
- No invented data. Every number in the report comes from a Kragle API response. Never estimate or infer workflow counts.
Anti-Rationalization Counter-Table
| Excuse | Reality |
| "I spot-checked a few workflows and they look fine." | Check ALL workflows. A single missed failure defeats the purpose of the report. |
| "The workflow failed but I didn't call get_instance_failures because the status says it all." | FAILED status tells you nothing actionable. The step_id and error from get_instance_failures is what the on-call needs. Call it. |
| "I'll skip the sandbox/prod parameter since the default is fine." | The Kragle default is sandbox. Your report will silently cover test workflows. Always pass cluster="prod" explicitly. |
| "Everything succeeded so there's nothing to report." | The report IS the evidence. Write the full structure with counts and timestamps. |
| "There are too many workflows to check individually." | Increase the limit parameter. The report must cover the full set, not a sample. |
| "The instance link wasn't in the response." | It is — check the instance_link field in get_latest_instance and get_instance_failures responses. |
Termination Labels
| Label | Meaning |
report_complete | All workflows checked, all sections populated, failures have step-level detail |
report_partial | Some workflows checked but API errors prevented full coverage — note which were skipped |
no_workflows_found | search_workflows returned empty — owner pattern may be wrong |
api_error | Kragle API unreachable or returning errors — report what was gathered before failure |
Self-Review Checklist
Before delivering the report, verify:
- Every Kragle call used cluster="prod" (or user-specified cluster)
- Total workflows in Summary matches count from search_workflows
- Every FAILED workflow has get_instance_failures output (step_id + link)
- Every IN_PROGRESS workflow has duration from get_instance_summary
- Failed section appears before Succeeded section
- Instance links are present for all failed and in-progress workflows
- Report has a date header and owner filter noted
- HTML version uploaded to S3 with commuter link (unless
--no-htmlor upload failed with noted fallback) - Slack/chat delivery uses TLDR + link, not the full report
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.

