Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

airflow-dag-analyzer(气流 DAG 分析仪)

airflow-dag-analyzer 用于记录任务执行中的错误、用户纠正、经验和能力缺口,适合在 OpenClaw 中希望让 Agent 持续沉淀问题、修正和最佳实践时使用。可结合来源仓库、安装命令和原始 README 继续核验具体用法。安装前建议确认权限范围、维护状态,以及是否会触发联网、命令执行或文件读写。

airflow-dag-analyzer 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 OpenClaw,通过ClawHub获取,权限为只读;许可证为 MIT-0,第三方扫描已通过,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 43,619。

总安装 973周安装 39GitHub Stars 公开资料未说明下载 315核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
MIT-0
版本
1.0.0

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:airflow-dag-analyzer(气流 DAG 分析仪)
来源仓库:https://github.com/charlie-morrison/airflow-dag-analyzer
安装命令:
openclaw skills install airflow-dag-analyzer
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 OpenClaw 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。

ClawHubOpenClaw
openclaw skills install airflow-dag-analyzer

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

分析 Apache Airflow DAG 的质量与运维最佳实践。检查任务依赖、SLA 合规性与重试策略。适用于数据流水线可靠性评估。适用宿主包括 OpenClaw,接入前应确认版本、权限和运行环境要求。安装前需确认是否允许读取配置文件与日志数据。

airflow-dag-analyzer 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 OpenClaw;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 openclaw skills install airflow-dag-analyzer;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它标注为只读,先用只读任务试一次,确认行为符合预期再扩大使用范围。

常见问题

6 条

airflow-dag-analyzer 怎么安装?

在终端执行 openclaw skills install airflow-dag-analyzer。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

airflow-dag-analyzer 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 OpenClaw。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

airflow-dag-analyzer 需要什么权限?

权限级别是只读。该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

airflow-dag-analyzer 是免费的吗?

来源标注的许可证是 MIT-0。本站不代收任何费用,也不托管安装包;能否商用、要不要署名,以许可证原文为准。

airflow-dag-analyzer 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 973 次,近一周安装 39 次,下载 315 次。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

airflow-dag-analyzer 安全吗?

第三方扫描结果为通过,但这只覆盖已知的静态检查项,不能替代自己读一遍源码和安装命令。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 专注 OpenClaw 一种宿主,触发方式和使用习惯不用来回切换。
  • 许可证明确为 MIT-0,商用和分发边界好判断。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。
  • 标注为只读权限,试用阶段不容易误改本地文件。

先想清楚的地方

  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 OpenClaw,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。
  • 需要许可证清楚、并且有第三方扫描结果的团队项目。

不太适合

  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
airflow-dag-analyzer

气流 DAG 分析仪 · 本页

973—只读MIT-0通过

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

name
cm-airflow-dag-analyzer
description
Analyze Apache Airflow DAG definitions for quality, reliability, and operational best practices. Checks task dependencies, SLA compliance, retry policies, resource allocation, sensor timeouts, trigger rules, pool usage, and DAG complexity. Use when asked to review Airflow DAGs, audit DAG quality, check Airflow best practices, analyze task dependencies, optimize DAG performance, review Airflow configuration, or troubleshoot DAG failures. Triggers on "airflow", "DAG", "airflow dag", "dag review", "airflow audit", "task dependencies", "airflow best practices", "dag quality", "airflow optimization", "dag analysis", "airflow troubleshoot", "dag performance".
metadata
tags
["airflow", "data-engineering", "orchestration", "dag", "pipeline", "scheduling", "etl", "data-pipeline", "workflow", "reliability"]

Airflow DAG Analyzer

Analyze Apache Airflow DAG definitions for quality, reliability, and operational excellence. Reviews task dependencies, retry policies, SLA configurations, resource allocation, sensor patterns, error handling, and DAG structure. Acts as a senior data platform engineer auditing your Airflow deployment.

Usage

Invoke this skill when you need to review Airflow DAGs for quality issues, optimize performance, or ensure operational best practices.

Basic invocation:

Analyze the Airflow DAGs in /path/to/dags/ Review this DAG file for best practices Check DAG quality for production readiness

Focused analysis:

Check retry policies across all DAGs Find DAGs without SLA configurations Analyze task dependency structure for bottlenecks Review sensor configurations for timeout risks

The agent reads DAG Python files, parses task definitions, and produces a comprehensive quality report.

How It Works

Step 1: Discover and Parse DAG Files

The agent locates and reads all DAG definitions:

# Find all DAG files
find /path/to/dags/ -name "*.py" -type f

# Identify which files contain DAG definitions
grep -rl "DAG\|@dag" /path/to/dags/ --include="*.py"

# Check for dynamic DAG generation
grep -rn "globals()\|create_dag\|dag_factory\|generate_dag" /path/to/dags/ --include="*.py"

The agent parses each DAG file to extract:

  • DAG ID and description
  • Schedule interval (cron expression or preset)
  • Default arguments (default_args dict)
  • Task definitions (operators, task IDs, dependencies)
  • Task group structure (TaskGroups for logical grouping)
  • Callbacks (on_failure, on_success, on_retry, SLA miss)
  • Tags and owners for organizational metadata
  • Imports and custom operators for dependency analysis

Step 2: Audit DAG-Level Configuration

The agent checks each DAG's top-level configuration:

Schedule configuration:

# GOOD: Explicit schedule with catchup disabled
dag = DAG(
    dag_id="etl_daily_orders",
    schedule_interval="0 6 * * *",
    catchup=False,
    start_date=datetime(2026, 1, 1),
    tags=["etl", "orders", "production"],
)

# PROBLEMS the agent detects:
FAIL: dag_id="etl_daily_orders"
  catchup=True (default) — will backfill all dates from start_date
  RISK: Accidental mass backfill on deploy, resource exhaustion
  FIX: Set catchup=False unless intentional backfill is needed

FAIL: dag_id="report_generator"
  start_date=datetime.now() — dynamic start_date
  RISK: Start date changes on every scheduler restart, breaks idempotency
  FIX: Use a fixed date: start_date=datetime(2026, 1, 1)

WARN: dag_id="data_sync"
  No schedule_interval defined — DAG defaults to daily
  FIX: Explicitly set schedule_interval (even if daily)

FAIL: dag_id="ml_training"
  max_active_runs=None (unlimited)
  RISK: Overlapping runs cause resource contention and data corruption
  FIX: Set max_active_runs=1 for data pipelines

WARN: dag_id="analytics_refresh"
  No tags defined
  FIX: Add tags for filtering in the UI: tags=["analytics", "production"]

WARN: dag_id="customer_export"
  No doc_md or description
  FIX: Add DAG documentation for operators and on-call engineers

Default arguments audit:

# The agent checks default_args for completeness:
default_args = {
    "owner": "data-team",               # WHO: Required for accountability
    "depends_on_past": False,            # DEPENDENCY: Usually False for resilience
    "email": ["data-team@company.com"],  # ALERTS: Team email for notifications
    "email_on_failure": True,            # ALERTS: Must be True for production
    "email_on_retry": False,             # ALERTS: Usually False (too noisy)
    "retries": 3,                        # RESILIENCE: Required for production
    "retry_delay": timedelta(minutes=5), # RESILIENCE: Required with retries
    "retry_exponential_backoff": True,   # RESILIENCE: Prevents thundering herd
    "max_retry_delay": timedelta(minutes=60),
    "execution_timeout": timedelta(hours=2),  # SAFETY: Prevents hanging tasks
    "sla": timedelta(hours=4),           # SLA: When should we be concerned
    "on_failure_callback": alert_slack,  # ALERTS: Custom alerting
}
Default Args Audit: etl_daily_orders

  FAIL: No "retries" defined — tasks will not retry on transient failures
        Production DAGs should have retries >= 2
  
  FAIL: No "execution_timeout" — tasks can hang indefinitely
        Risk: Zombie tasks consuming worker slots for hours/days
        Recommend: Set based on expected duration + buffer (2x typical)

  FAIL: No "on_failure_callback" — team not notified on failures
        Recommend: Add Slack/PagerDuty callback for production DAGs

  WARN: No "sla" defined — no SLA tracking
        Recommend: Set SLA based on business requirements

  WARN: "owner" = "airflow" (default) — no ownership attribution
        Recommend: Set to team or individual responsible for the DAG

  PASS: "depends_on_past" = False — good for resilience
  PASS: "email_on_failure" = True — email alerts configured

Step 3: Analyze Task Dependencies and DAG Structure

The agent maps the dependency graph and checks for structural issues:

DAG Structure Analysis: etl_daily_orders

  Tasks: 14
  Max depth: 6 (levels of sequential dependencies)
  Max width: 4 (maximum parallel tasks at any level)
  Critical path: extract -> validate -> transform -> aggregate -> load -> notify
  Critical path duration: estimated 45 min (sum of median task durations)

  Dependency Graph:
    extract_orders ─┐
    extract_items  ─┤
    extract_users  ─┴─> validate_data ─> transform ─> aggregate ─┐
                                                                    ├─> load_warehouse
    extract_config ────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
                                                                    └─> load_cache
    load_warehouse ─┐
    load_cache     ─┴─> run_tests ─> notify_complete

Structural checks:

FAIL: Task "transform" has 3 upstream dependencies but creates a bottleneck
  All downstream tasks wait for transform to complete
  RECOMMEND: Split transform into independent sub-tasks that can run in parallel:
    transform_orders, transform_items, transform_users

FAIL: Linear chain of 6 tasks where 3 could run in parallel
  extract -> validate -> transform -> test -> load -> notify
  RECOMMEND: Parallelize extract tasks, parallelize test + load where possible

WARN: Task "extract_config" has no downstream dependencies
  This task runs but nothing depends on its output
  Is this intentional? May be a dead task.

WARN: DAG has 14 tasks — approaching complexity threshold
  RECOMMEND: Consider using TaskGroups to organize related tasks

FAIL: Circular dependency risk detected in dynamic task generation
  Loop generates tasks but dependency chain references previous iteration
  RISK: Can create circular dependency at runtime depending on data

Fan-out / fan-in analysis:

Fan-out at "validate_data": 1 -> 4 tasks
  OK: Reasonable parallelism

Fan-in at "load_warehouse": 4 -> 1 tasks
  WARN: Single point of failure — if any upstream fails, load fails
  Consider: Use trigger_rule="none_failed_min_one_success" if partial loads acceptable

Step 4: Review Retry and Error Handling Policies

The agent evaluates resilience configuration:

Retry Policy Analysis:

  Task: extract_api_data
    retries: 0    <-- FAIL: API calls should always retry
    Recommend: retries=3, retry_delay=timedelta(minutes=2),
               retry_exponential_backoff=True

  Task: load_to_warehouse
    retries: 5, retry_delay: 1 minute
    WARN: 5 retries * 1 min = only 5 min total retry window
    For warehouse operations, recommend:
      retries=3, retry_delay=timedelta(minutes=5),
      retry_exponential_backoff=True,
      max_retry_delay=timedelta(minutes=30)
    This gives ~35 min retry window for transient warehouse issues

  Task: send_email_report
    retries: 10, retry_delay: 10 seconds
    WARN: Aggressive retry on email — may trigger rate limits
    Recommend: retries=3, retry_delay=timedelta(minutes=1)

Trigger rule analysis:

  Task: run_quality_checks
    trigger_rule: "all_success" (default)
    OK: Quality checks should only run if all data loaded

  Task: send_failure_alert
    trigger_rule: "all_success" (default)
    FAIL: Alert task should fire on failure
    FIX: trigger_rule="one_failed" or "all_done"

  Task: cleanup_temp_files
    trigger_rule: "all_success"
    WARN: Cleanup won't run if upstream fails — temp files accumulate
    FIX: trigger_rule="all_done" — cleanup should always run

Step 5: Audit Sensor Configurations

Sensors are a common source of production issues. The agent checks each sensor:

Sensor Analysis:

  FAIL: ExternalTaskSensor("wait_for_upstream_dag")
    mode="poke" (default), poke_interval=60s, timeout=3600s
    PROBLEM: Poke mode holds a worker slot while waiting
    At 60s interval for up to 1 hour = 1 worker slot blocked
    FIX: mode="reschedule" — releases worker between pokes

  FAIL: S3KeySensor("wait_for_file")
    timeout=7200s (2 hours), no explicit timeout action
    PROBLEM: If file never arrives, sensor blocks for 2 hours then fails
    FIX: Add soft_fail=True to skip downstream tasks gracefully
    OR: Add on_failure_callback to alert when file is late

  WARN: SqlSensor("check_data_ready")
    poke_interval=30s
    PROBLEM: Polling database every 30s for extended periods
    FIX: Increase poke_interval to 300s, use mode="reschedule"

  WARN: HttpSensor("wait_for_api")
    No exponential_backoff=True
    RISK: Fixed-interval polling may hit rate limits
    FIX: Add exponential_backoff=True

Sensor best practices checklist:

SettingRecommendedWhy
mode"reschedule"Releases worker slot between pokes
timeoutSet explicitlyPrevents indefinite waits
poke_interval300s+ for external depsReduces load on external systems
soft_failTrue for optional depsPrevents blocking entire DAG
exponential_backoffTrue for APIsPrevents rate limiting

Step 6: Check Resource Allocation

The agent reviews resource configuration:

Resource Analysis:

  WARN: No pool assignments detected
    All 14 tasks run in default pool (128 slots)
    RISK: This DAG competes with all other DAGs for worker slots
    RECOMMEND: Assign pools for resource-intensive tasks:
      - "api_pool" (limit=5) for API extraction tasks
      - "warehouse_pool" (limit=10) for database operations

  WARN: Task "heavy_transform" has no resource constraints
    KubernetesPodOperator without resource requests/limits
    RISK: Can consume unlimited cluster resources
    FIX: Add resources=k8s.V1ResourceRequirements(
           requests={"memory": "2Gi", "cpu": "1"},
           limits={"memory": "4Gi", "cpu": "2"}
         )

  WARN: No priority_weight set on critical path tasks
    All tasks have equal priority (default=1)
    RECOMMEND: Set higher priority_weight for critical path tasks
    to ensure they're scheduled first when workers are constrained

Step 7: Validate Operator Usage

The agent checks that operators are used correctly:

Operator Analysis:

  FAIL: BashOperator with inline script (15 lines)
    Task: "complex_transformation"
    PROBLEM: Complex logic in BashOperator is hard to test and maintain
    FIX: Move to PythonOperator or a standalone script

  FAIL: PythonOperator calling subprocess.run()
    Task: "run_spark_job"
    PROBLEM: Bypasses Airflow's operator framework
    FIX: Use SparkSubmitOperator or BashOperator for CLI commands

  WARN: BranchPythonOperator without join task
    Task: "check_data_quality"
    Branches to "process_good_data" or "handle_bad_data"
    But no downstream join — one branch's downstream tasks are skipped
    RECOMMEND: Add a join task with trigger_rule="none_failed_min_one_success"

  WARN: Multiple ShortCircuitOperator in sequence
    Tasks: "check_weekday", "check_data_exists", "check_flag"
    PROBLEM: Unclear which condition caused the circuit to break
    FIX: Combine conditions or add logging to each operator

  FAIL: Using SubDagOperator
    Task: "process_subtasks"
    SubDagOperator is DEPRECATED and causes deadlocks
    FIX: Replace with TaskGroup (Airflow 2.0+)

Step 8: Review SLA and Monitoring Configuration

The agent checks operational visibility:

SLA Configuration:

  FAIL: 8 of 12 production DAGs have no SLA defined
    DAGs without SLA: etl_orders, etl_users, report_daily, ...
    RISK: Data pipeline delays go unnoticed until stakeholders complain

  WARN: DAG "etl_critical" has SLA=6 hours, schedule=daily
    SLA allows data to be 6+ hours late before alert
    RECOMMEND: Tighten to 2 hours based on downstream consumer requirements

  FAIL: No sla_miss_callback defined for any DAG
    Email-only SLA alerts are often missed
    RECOMMEND: Add callback for Slack/PagerDuty integration

Monitoring Gaps:
  FAIL: No task-level execution_timeout on 23 tasks
    Risk: Zombie tasks silently consume resources
  
  WARN: No Airflow metrics exported (statsd/prometheus)
    Recommend: Enable statsd metrics for:
      - scheduler.heartbeat
      - dag_processing.total_parse_time
      - executor.open_slots
      - task_instance.duration

Step 9: Check Idempotency and Data Safety

The agent evaluates whether DAGs are safe to re-run:

Idempotency Analysis:

  FAIL: Task "load_orders" uses INSERT without UPSERT logic
    Re-running this task will create duplicate rows
    FIX: Use INSERT ... ON CONFLICT DO UPDATE (PostgreSQL)
    OR: Use MERGE statement (Snowflake/BigQuery)
    OR: Use DELETE+INSERT pattern within a transaction

  FAIL: Task "export_to_s3" writes to fixed S3 key
    s3://bucket/exports/orders.csv
    Re-running overwrites without versioning
    FIX: Use execution_date in path:
      s3://bucket/exports/orders/{{ ds }}/orders.csv

  WARN: Task "send_notification" has no idempotency check
    Re-running sends duplicate Slack messages
    RECOMMEND: Add check for already-sent notification for this execution_date

  PASS: Task "create_report" uses execution_date in output path
    Safe to re-run — produces same output for same execution_date

Step 10: Produce the Analysis Report

The agent generates a comprehensive report:

# Airflow DAG Analysis Report
# DAGs Directory: /opt/airflow/dags/ | Date: April 30, 2026

## Overview
  Total DAGs: 12
  Total tasks: 87
  Production DAGs: 9
  Development DAGs: 3

## Overall Health Score: 58/100

## Category Scores
  DAG Configuration:    6/10  (catchup, schedule, max_active_runs)
  Default Args:         4/10  (retries, timeouts, callbacks)
  Task Dependencies:    7/10  (DAG structure, bottlenecks)
  Retry Policies:       5/10  (missing retries, bad intervals)
  Sensor Config:        4/10  (poke mode, no timeouts)
  Resource Allocation:  5/10  (no pools, no limits)
  Operator Usage:       6/10  (deprecated operators, misuse)
  SLA & Monitoring:     3/10  (missing SLAs, no callbacks)
  Idempotency:          5/10  (duplicate risk on re-run)
  Code Quality:         7/10  (imports, structure, DRY)

## Critical Issues (Production Risk)
  1. 8 DAGs have catchup=True — risk of accidental mass backfill
  2. 23 tasks have no execution_timeout — zombie task risk
  3. SubDagOperator in use — deprecated, causes deadlocks
  4. 4 sensors using poke mode — blocking worker slots
  5. No SLA monitoring on critical data pipelines

## High Priority
  6. No retry policies on API-dependent tasks
  7. No pools configured — resource contention risk
  8. INSERT without upsert — duplicate data on re-runs
  9. No failure callbacks — team not alerted on failures

## Recommendations Summary
  Estimated effort: 3-5 days for critical + high priority fixes
  Expected improvement: 58 -> 82 health score
  Risk reduction: Eliminates 4 classes of production incidents

Output

The agent produces:

  • Health score: 0-100 overall DAG quality rating
  • Category scores: granular ratings for each quality dimension
  • Critical issues: problems that pose immediate production risk
  • Per-DAG analysis: configuration audit for each DAG
  • Per-task findings: specific task-level issues with fix recommendations
  • Dependency visualization: text-based DAG structure with bottleneck annotations
  • Remediation code: exact Python code to fix each issue
  • Priority matrix: issues ranked by risk and effort

Scope Options

ScopeWhat It Covers
Full (default)All DAGs, all checks
Single DAGDeep analysis of one DAG file
CategoryOne check category across all DAGs (e.g., only retry policies)
Production onlyOnly DAGs tagged as production
ChangedOnly DAG files changed in current git branch

Airflow Version Support

The agent adapts its recommendations based on the Airflow version detected:

FeatureAirflow 1.xAirflow 2.x
TaskGroupsN/A (use SubDagOperator)Recommended over SubDag
TaskFlow APIN/ARecommended for Python tasks
TimetablesN/ARecommended over cron strings for complex schedules
Dynamic Task MappingN/ARecommended for variable task counts
Dataset-driven schedulingN/ARecommended for event-driven pipelines (2.4+)

Tips for Best Results

  • Point the agent at your actual DAGs directory for a real audit
  • Provide Airflow version info for version-appropriate recommendations
  • Include custom operators and utility modules in the scan path
  • For the most thorough analysis, also share Airflow configuration (airflow.cfg) so the agent can cross-reference pool sizes, executor type, and parallelism settings
  • Run this analysis before major DAG deployments or as a quarterly health check
  • Combine with log analysis to correlate code issues with actual failure patterns

平台分布

OpenClaw

90.7%
按下载量换算286

安全审计

VirusTotal

通过

ClawScan

通过

Static analysis

通过

权限和风险

只读

该 Skill 主要提供规则、说明或参考内容,本身偏只读;真正读写文件、联网或执行命令仍取决于宿主 Agent 的任务。

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。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills