Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx agentmods add skills/zpower426/datapowers/debugging-pipelinesnpx skills add zpower426/datapowers --skill debugging-pipelinesgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/zpower426/datapowersWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/zpower426/datapowers/debugging-pipelines)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/zpower426/datapowers/debugging-pipelines"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/zpower426/datapowers/debugging-pipelines.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5 | $0.00034 | $0.01723 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00861 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00345 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00172 |
Grade A, and why
debugging-pipelines scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 4d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 221 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Debugging Data & ML Pipelines
Systematic root cause investigation for broken data pipelines, unexpected model behavior, and analysis anomalies.
Iron Law: NO FIXES WITHOUT ROOT CAUSE INVESTIGATION
Checklist
- Reproduce the problem — get a minimal reproducible example
- Characterize the symptom — what exactly is wrong? Exact numbers.
- Form hypotheses — list 3-5 possible causes, ranked by likelihood
- Test hypotheses — binary elimination, most likely first
- Identify root cause — confirmed with evidence, not assumption
- Fix at the root — address root cause, not symptom
- Verify fix — run the failing case to confirm resolution
- Check for recurrence — add validation or test to prevent regression
Problem Types and Investigation Paths
Type 1: Data Pipeline Error (Exception/Crash)
Error → Read full traceback → Identify failing line
↓
Check input data at the failing step
↓
Is input shape/type what code expects? → NO → data preparation bug
↓ YES
Is a column missing? → check upstream step or schema change
↓
Is a value out of range? → check upstream validation
# Minimal reproduction
import traceback
try:
result = pipeline.fit_transform(problematic_df)
except Exception as e:
traceback.print_exc()
print(f"\nInput shape: {problematic_df.shape}")
print(f"Input dtypes:\n{problematic_df.dtypes}")
print(f"Null counts:\n{problematic_df.isnull().sum()}")
Type 2: Model Performance Degradation
Performance dropped from training to production? Work through this list:
1. Data distribution shift?
→ Compare feature distributions: training vs current
→ KS test or PSI (Population Stability Index)
2. Target distribution shift?
→ Compare class ratios or target mean
3. Missing features?
→ Check if all expected features are present and non-null
4. Feature engineering bug?
→ Compare sample features manually (pick 3 rows, trace by hand)
5. Wrong model version loaded?
→ Log model hash, confirm version
6. Data leakage in training (inflated training metrics)?
→ Re-evaluate on a fresh hold-out never used during development
What ships with it
6 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 4d ago First seen · 221 lines · 34 tokens per session scan A 9bafc4fa3363
debugging-pipelines is a skill published in the GitHub repository zpower426/datapowers (1 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 34 tokens to every session and 1,723 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
peer-conversation
Многотуровый диалог писателя (Claude) с одним или несколькими напарниками (любой набор из kimi/codex/hermes/claude-headless) по задаче пилота (DP.SC.154). Ведёт turn-loop (2 участника) или round-loop (3+, WP-509), обнаруживает CONSENSUS/ESCALATE, после консенсуса — Decision Gate (зафиксировать vs реализовать → ревью →…
kimi-peer-writer
Peer-сессия DP.SC.154 где Kimi = писатель, Claude = напарник. Запускается простой фразой. Включает ОРЗ Opening и Closing, turn-loop, эскалации, Decision Gate (зафиксировать vs реализовать → ревью → проверить → задеплоить), отложенную финализацию и верификацию.
pack-new
Create a new Pack — guided flow through SPF: choose domain, name Pack, scaffold structure, fill roadmap.
apply-captures
Разбор extraction-reports со status pending-review — решение R15 (accept/reject/defer) ЖИВЫМ ПИЛОТОМ, запись в Pack, обновление статуса, коммит. Вызывать при Close при наличии N>0 pending-review отчётов.
archgate
Оценка архитектурного решения по 7 характеристикам ЭМОГССБ (v3.1 — фильтр допуска, атрибут-сценарии, совет затронутых сторон; профиль без агрегатного балла, conjunctive screening). Используй когда пользователь предлагает архитектурное решение, новый инструмент или системное изменение.
bottleneck-pick
Аналитик ограничений (DP.ROLE.054): находит главное ограничение (bottleneck) конкретного конвейера через TOC Five Steps + EC + NBR и строит Stage Dependency Map. Используй ТОЛЬКО при работе с конкретным WP, эпиком, проектом или weekplan (--target WP-NNN|weekplan|pilot:id). НЕ используй для общих вопросов приоритизации…