baseline-comparison-review
Skill6 starsChanged 4 months agoApache-2.0View on GitHub
Use when a new or more complex ML model is proposed and its value over simple baselines is not yet demonstrated -- before approving a new architecture or replacing an existing heuristic.
In this repository116 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- skills/graphify/references/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- agent-config-security-auditSkill
- agent-harness-designSkill
- agent-readable-docsSkill
- agent-runtime-patternsSkill
- agent-session-forensicsSkill
- ai-regression-testingSkill
- ai-slop-cleanerSkill
- api-doc-reviewSkill
- architecture-decision-recordsSkill
- architecture-simplificationSkill
- ask-claudeSkill
- ask-codexSkill
- ask-geminiSkill
- autonomous-delivery-pipelineSkill
- bigquery-cost-auditSkill
- brainstormingSkill
- browser-automation-safetySkill
- bug-huntSkill
- build-fix-minimal-diffSkill
- canonical-advisor-routingSkill
- change-impact-checkSkill
- changelog-generatorSkill
- ci-failure-readoutSkill
- codebase-migration-batchesSkill
- context-compressionSkill
- context-docsSkill
- context-minimizationSkill
- context-retrieval-loopSkill
- data-qualitySkill
- dataset-split-reviewSkill
- dbt-incremental-strategy-auditSkill
- dbt-preflightSkill
- dbt-strategySkill
- dead-code-removalSkill
- defuddleSkill
- dependency-cleanupSkill
- deploy-pipeline-runbookSkill
- dispatching-parallel-agentsSkill
- doc-consistency-checkSkill
- environment-doctorSkill
- experiment-tracking-reviewSkill
- failure-triageSkill
- filesystem-mcp-guardrailsSkill
- finishing-a-development-branchSkill
- flaky-test-investigationSkill
- gh-address-commentsSkill
- github-ci-failure-triageSkill
- graphifySkill
- handoff-disciplineSkill
- hard-won-skill-extractorSkill
- hook-safety-reviewSkill
- incident-readoutSkill
- incremental-migrationSkill
- json-canvasSkill
- local-rag-mcpSkill
- log-driven-diagnosisSkill
- managed-codebase-contextSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
2 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 0 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.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 29
Evaluate the delta: if the complex model only beats the heuristic baseline marginally (e.g., ~1%), recommend keeping the heuristic — the …
- Distinctive: line 30
Demand a baseline evaluation script: before approving the new architecture, so the comparison is rerunnable.
≈ “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
Purpose
Machine learning models add technical debt. A complex model earns its place only by clearly outperforming a "dumb" baseline; this review makes that comparison explicit before a new model is approved.
When to Use
- A new model architecture is proposed for approval
- A complex model would replace an existing heuristic or rule
- Reported gains have not been compared against any baseline
Inputs
- The candidate model's evaluation results (metric + data split)
- The evaluation code, or enough dataset/task detail to define fair baselines
Workflow
- Define the naive baseline:
- Classification: predict the majority class.
- Regression: predict the mean or median of the training target.
- Time series: predict the last known value (naive persistence).
- Define the heuristic baseline: what simple if/else rule would a domain expert write?
- Evaluate both baselines on the same split and metric as the candidate model.
- Evaluate the delta: if the complex model only beats the heuristic baseline marginally (e.g., ~1%), recommend keeping the heuristic — the complexity is not worth the maintenance cost.
- Demand a baseline evaluation script before approving the new architecture, so the comparison is rerunnable.
Output
- A baseline-vs-model comparison on identical data and metric, with an explicit keep/replace recommendation that weighs maintenance cost
Verification
- Naive baseline defined and evaluated
- Heuristic baseline defined and evaluated (or explicitly ruled out with a reason)
- Candidate compared on the same split and metric as the baselines
- Delta judged against maintenance cost, not just statistical improvement
- A rerunnable baseline evaluation script exists
Failure Modes
- No heuristic baseline — comparing only against the naive baseline makes weak models look strong. Ask what rule a domain expert would write.
- Unequal comparison — baseline evaluated on a different split or metric than the model. Re-run both on identical data.
- Complexity bias — approving a model for a marginal gain without stating the maintenance cost in the recommendation.
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.

