Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

data-analysis(数据分析)

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。

data-analysis 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为需要联网;许可证信息还不明确,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 33,144。

总安装 2,399周安装 102GitHub Stars 11下载 840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
unknown

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/oh-my-skills
仓库路径:skills/data-analysis
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/akillness/oh-my-skills --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/oh-my-skills --skill data-analysis

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。

用于辅助数据清洗、汇总与异常检测,生成业务可读结论。适合处理 CSV、JSON、SQL 表或事件日志,输出统计口径。需验证数据质量,避免将样本误作全量事实。

安装命令:npx skills add https://github.com/akillness/oh-my-skills --skill data-analysis。涉及敏感数据时应先脱敏并获得操作授权。

来源仓库内路径:skills/data-analysis

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 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI;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 npx skills add https://github.com/akillness/oh-my-skills --skill data-analysis;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

    它需要需要联网,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

data-analysis 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/akillness/oh-my-skills --skill data-analysis。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

data-analysis 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI。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。

data-analysis 需要什么权限?

权限级别是需要联网。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。

data-analysis 是免费的吗?

公开资料没有标注明确许可证,收费和商用限制都无法确认。正式使用前请到来源仓库核对授权说明。

data-analysis 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 2,399 次,近一周安装 102 次,下载 840 次,GitHub 11 星。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。

data-analysis 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

  • 同时适配 4 种工具,换客户端不用重新找替代品。
  • 第三方扫描已通过,常见的高风险行为没有命中。

先想清楚的地方

  • 许可证没有明确标注,能不能商用、能不能再分发都不确定。
  • 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 Codex,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。

不太适合

  • 需要明确授权才能用到公司项目里的场景。
  • 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
data-analysis

数据分析 · 本页

2,39911需要联网未明确通过

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

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 scanning → pattern-detection
  • Dashboard construction / BigQuery-connected reporting → looker-studio-bigquery
  • Raw log triage before dataset shaping → log-analysis
  • Repo/code investigation to find instrumentation or metric definitions → codebase-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.

平台分布

Codex

38.01%
按下载量换算319

Claude

32.46%
按下载量换算273

Cursor

17.11%
按下载量换算144

Gemini CLI

8.6%
按下载量换算72

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。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