Token导航 LogoToken导航TokenDH.com
研究检索需要联网github未标认证来源可访问许可证需确认审计通过

data-analysis数据分析

Agent Skill

用于辅助数据整理、表格处理、CSV/Excel 分析、指标计算和图表准备。它适合让 Agent 清洗字段、汇总数据、发现异常、生成统计口径或把分析结果转成可读说明。使用时需要确认数据来源、字段含义和时间范围,避免把样本数据当全量事实;涉及敏感数据、导出文件或批量写回时,应先确认权限和脱敏边界。

总安装

1,236

周安装

52

GitHub Stars

11

下载量

433
CodexClaudeCursorGemini CLI

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明和来源信息,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。

GitHub

来源数

2

许可证

unknown

最后核验

2026-05-01

来源状态

来源可访问

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:data-analysis(数据分析)
来源仓库:https://github.com/akillness/skills-template
仓库路径:skills/data-analysis
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/akillness/skills-template --skill data-analysis
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/akillness/skills-template --skill data-analysis

简介

用于数据集的分析与结论提炼。data-analysis 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

  • 支持 CSV/Excel 清洗、指标计算和异常检测。
  • 需提供统计口径和业务解释,而非仅代码片段。
  • 需区分样本与全量数据,避免误导结论。
  • 涉及敏感信息时应先脱敏再处理。适用宿主包括 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,接入前应确认版本、权限和运行环境要求。

SKILL.md

Data Analysis

When to use this skill

  • The user has a dataset, export, report extract, query result, or shaped event / telemetry table and wants evidence-backed conclusions.
  • The task is to understand what changed, compare segments, summarize performance, or explain anomalies in business terms.
  • The request mentions CSV, JSON, SQL tables, retention, cohorts, funnels, conversion, spend, telemetry, event exports, or KPIs.
  • The work needs data-quality checks before conclusions.
  • The user needs a concise analysis narrative, not just raw code snippets.

Do not use this skill as the main workflow when:

  • The main goal is repeated anomaly or code-pattern scanning across code/data assets → use pattern-detection.
  • The main goal is building or tuning a specific BI dashboard / Looker Studio + BigQuery workflow → use looker-studio-bigquery.
  • The task is repository navigation or call-site tracing rather than dataset reasoning → use codebase-search.
  • The problem is raw log triage / incident reconstruction rather than dataset analysis → use log-analysis.

Core idea

Data analysis is a staged reasoning workflow:

  1. clarify the decision question
  2. profile the data and trust level
  3. choose the cheapest analysis lane that can answer it
  4. separate observation from interpretation
  5. finish with evidence, caveats, and next actions

Do not jump straight into charts or code. The goal is decision-quality analysis.

Instructions

Step 1: Frame the analysis question

Before touching the data, define:

  • Decision to support — what action or judgment depends on this analysis?
  • Primary metric(s) — conversion, retention, revenue, latency, churn, balance, spend efficiency, etc.
  • Dimensions / segments — time, channel, cohort, region, plan, device, feature flag, player segment
  • Comparison mode — before/after, control/treatment, top vs bottom segments, expected vs actual
  • Time window — day/week/month/release/experiment period

If the request is vague, restate it as:

"We need to explain [metric/outcome] for [audience] over [time window] and identify the strongest drivers or caveats."

Step 2: Run a trust check before analysis

Always start with data-quality triage.

Minimum trust checklist

  • row count / extract size
  • schema and types
  • missing values / null-heavy columns
  • duplicates or repeated IDs
  • time range coverage and timezone assumptions
  • segment completeness (channels, countries, devices, builds, player groups)
  • obvious join / aggregation errors
  • outliers or impossible values

Default check pattern:

import pandas as pd

# df = pd.read_csv(...)
print(df.shape)
print(df.dtypes)
print(df.head())
print(df.isna().sum().sort_values(ascending=False).head(15))
print(df.duplicated().sum())

If trust is low, stop promising conclusions and explicitly switch the output to:

  • what is trustworthy
  • what is suspect
  • what additional cleanup or data is needed

Step 3: Choose the analysis lane

LaneUse whenTypical toolsWhat success looks like
Spreadsheet-scale triageSmall extracts, PM/ops handoff, quick KPI sanity checksSheets / Excel / quick table reviewFast overview, obvious errors and top movements surfaced
SQL slicingData already lives in a DB / warehouse or needs grouped filters fastSQL / DuckDB / warehouse queryClean aggregates, cohorts, funnels, comparisons
Notebook / statistical analysisMultiple metrics, cohort logic, experiment reasoning, telemetry or richer transformationspandas / notebooks / scriptsReproducible calculations and richer interpretation
Stakeholder-ready summaryThe answer is mostly known and needs explanation, not more slicingmarkdown memo / report / dashboard handoffClear findings, caveats, actions, and open questions

Pick the cheapest lane that can answer the question. Escalate only when needed.

Step 4: Use the right analysis pattern

Pattern A — Change explanation

Use for: experiments, release effects, KPI jumps/drops, spend shifts, gameplay balance changes.

Checklist:

  1. define baseline and comparison window
  2. confirm denominator / assignment integrity when this is an experiment or rollout comparison
  3. compute absolute + relative deltas
  4. break the change by top segments or drivers
  5. test whether the change is broad or concentrated
  6. call out confounders (seasonality, launch, tracking changes, sample size, significance/confidence limits)

Pattern B — Segment comparison

Use for: channel quality, user tiers, device classes, regions, player cohorts.

Checklist:

  1. rank segments by the primary metric
  2. include sample size / denominator
  3. compare both rate and volume
  4. watch for Simpson's-paradox-style aggregation traps
  5. explain what likely differentiates top vs bottom groups

Pattern C — Funnel / retention analysis

Use for: signup, purchase, onboarding, feature adoption, live-ops progression.

Checklist:

  1. define each stage/event clearly
  2. compute stage counts and conversion/drop-off rates
  3. segment by acquisition source, cohort, platform, build, or player type
  4. identify the highest-leverage drop-off point
  5. distinguish instrumentation gaps from genuine behavior problems

Pattern D — Telemetry / event analysis

Use for: gameplay telemetry, product event streams, operational exports.

Checklist:

  1. map raw events to derived metrics
  2. group by session/build/feature/segment/time
  3. identify spikes, sinkholes, and suspicious clusters
  4. separate normal variation from suspicious outliers
  5. route sustained anomaly-hunting work to pattern-detection if the task becomes detection-first

Step 5: Keep observations separate from interpretation

Structure findings in three layers:

  1. Observation — what the data literally shows
  2. Interpretation — likely meaning or driver
  3. Caveat / confidence — what could weaken the conclusion

Good example:

  • Observation: conversion dropped 6.2% week-over-week, concentrated in mobile Safari traffic.
  • Interpretation: the decline is likely connected to the recent checkout UI change on smaller screens.
  • Caveat: tracking for one payment method was also modified that week, so attribution is medium confidence.

Step 6: Return a decision-ready output

Default output shape:

## Analysis brief
- Goal: [decision question]
- Data source: [files / tables / export scope]
- Trust level: high | medium | low
- Lane used: spreadsheet triage | SQL slicing | notebook/statistical | summary-only

## Key findings
1. [finding]
2. [finding]
3. [finding]

## Supporting evidence
- [metric / segment / comparison]
- [metric / segment / comparison]

## Caveats
- [missing data / sample bias / instrumentation / seasonality]

## Recommended next actions
- [decision / follow-up slice / dashboard handoff / instrumentation fix]

If the user asked for recommendations, tie each recommendation to a specific finding. If the user only asked for analysis, stop at evidence + caveats.

Step 7: Route out when analysis stops being the bottleneck

Hand off when the next step is a different job:

  • Repeated anomaly hunting or rule-based scanningpattern-detection
  • Dashboard construction / BigQuery-connected reportinglooker-studio-bigquery
  • Raw log triage before dataset shapinglog-analysis
  • Repo/code investigation to find instrumentation or metric definitionscodebase-search

Examples

Example 1: Experiment analysis

Prompt:

Analyze this CSV export and tell me what changed after the pricing experiment.

Good response shape:

  • define baseline vs experiment window
  • check data coverage and segment completeness
  • report overall delta plus segment breakdown
  • identify strongest likely drivers and caveats

Example 2: Marketing + product analysis

Prompt:

We have app event logs and marketing spend by channel; find the main retention and CAC patterns.

Good response shape:

  • separate acquisition and retention metrics
  • compare rate and volume by channel/cohort
  • note trust limits if joins or attribution windows are unclear
  • summarize high-leverage channel differences

Example 3: Game telemetry analysis

Prompt:

Review this gameplay telemetry extract and summarize balance issues and suspicious outliers.

Good response shape:

  • map events to gameplay metrics
  • compare player/build/weapon/level segments
  • separate broad balance patterns from suspicious outliers
  • route repeated anomaly detection to pattern-detection if needed

Example 4: PM / ops export triage

Prompt:

I exported a dashboard to CSV; help me explain the KPI drop for leadership.

Good response shape:

  • start with trust checks on the export
  • identify the metric, time window, and comparison baseline
  • produce a concise leadership-ready memo with evidence and caveats

Best practices

  1. Start from the decision question, not the chart type.
  2. Run data-quality checks before interpretation.
  3. Always include sample size / denominator context when comparing segments.
  4. Prefer the cheapest sufficient lane instead of defaulting to heavy notebooks.
  5. Separate observation, interpretation, and caveat so the analysis stays honest.
  6. Route dashboard-building and anomaly-detection work to adjacent specialist skills when they become the real task.

References

Output format

Use a brief, findings-first summary with trust level, key evidence, caveats, and explicit next actions or handoffs.

适合场景

01

用户想查找某类 Agent Skill 时

02

需要根据任务场景推荐可安装能力包时

03

需要对比不同来源的安装命令和来源信息时

能力概览

能力 1

按任务关键词查找相关 Skills

能力 2

展示可复制的安装命令

能力 3

保留来源站点、仓库和原始说明,方便继续核验

能力 4

展示第三方安全扫描或审计结果

安装后应在对应宿主中按原始 README 的触发条件使用;具体调用方式请以来源页面和 README 为准。

平台分布

Codex

35.27%
按下载量换算153

Claude

28.61%
按下载量换算124

Cursor

17.57%
按下载量换算76

Gemini CLI

9.87%
按下载量换算43

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

通过

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。当前只有一个来源,正式发布前建议补源仓库或其他目录站核验。

来源信息

继续浏览同类 Skills