agentleFS
wachawowachawo/claude-skills/skills/drilldown-analyzer/SKILL.md

drilldown-analyzer

Skill0 starsChanged 6 months agoMITView on GitHub

Systematic investigation of metric changes and anomalies. Use when a metric unexpectedly changes, investigating business metric drops, explaining performance variations, or drilling into aggregated metric drivers.

Files
SKILL.md

Root Cause Investigation

When to use

  • A key metric dropped (or spiked) unexpectedly and the team needs an explanation
  • Stakeholders are asking "why did X happen?" and need an evidence-based answer
  • A metric change has been observed but the team is unsure whether it's noise or signal
  • Preparing a post-mortem after an incident that affected business metrics
  • A trend change happened weeks ago and needs retrospective investigation

Process

  1. Validate the change — confirm the metric changed beyond normal variance using a z-score or simple comparison to the rolling average. If the change is within ±1.5 standard deviations, document it as within normal range and close. Use scripts/drilldown_analyzer.py --validate.
  2. Establish a timeline — plot the metric over time to pinpoint when the change started. A sudden step change suggests a specific event; a gradual drift suggests a structural shift.
  3. Decompose the metric — break the metric into its constituent parts (e.g., revenue = volume × price × mix). Determine which component is driving the change before drilling into dimensions.
  4. Drill down systematically — compare the metric before vs. after the change across available dimensions (geography, platform, channel, product category, user segment). Sort by absolute contribution to identify the primary driver. Use scripts/drilldown_analyzer.py --drilldown. See references/rca_framework.md for the structured approach.
  5. Test hypotheses — generate explicit hypotheses (volume drop, mix shift, per-unit quality change, data issue) and accept or reject each with evidence. Correlate the timeline with known events from references/hypothesis_testing_guide.md.
  6. Write the root cause report — document the primary driver (quantified share of impact), supporting evidence, rejected hypotheses, and tiered recommendations (immediate / short-term / long-term). Use assets/rca_report_template.md.

Inputs the skill needs

  • Metric name and historical values (at least 30 days before the change)
  • Granular data with dimensional breakdowns (geography, platform, segment, etc.)
  • The date or date range when the change was noticed
  • A change log or incident log for the same period (product releases, campaigns, outages)
  • The business context: what decisions depend on this metric

Output

  • scripts/drilldown_analyzer.py — validates the change, computes dimensional drill-downs, and ranks contributors by impact
  • references/rca_framework.md — structured five-step RCA method with decision rules
  • references/hypothesis_testing_guide.md — checklist of common root causes and how to test each
  • assets/rca_report_template.md — report template: what changed, when, primary driver, supporting evidence, timeline, recommendations

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.