Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHubEnglish overview

rea-analysis-optimization

Investigate performance bottlenecks in REA analysis workflows and improve caching, queries, or shared processing. Compare completed tasks before and after changes while preserving correct results, examined coverage, and access to supporting evidence.

OriginalShow the original description

Optimize REA providers and shared analysis workflows for agent context, latency, CPU, and memory while preserving correctness and Evidence. Use for analysis bottlenecks and cache or query design; CI/test-suite optimization belongs to rea-ci-tests-audit.

AI rating90/ 100See how to install

Good for

  • Investigating slow analysis workflows
  • Reviewing cache keys and invalidation
  • Reducing CPU and memory use
  • Measuring performance without losing evidence

Overview

What it does

rea-analysis-optimization identifies unnecessary work in REA analysis and helps improve elapsed time, CPU use, memory use, and the amount of information an agent needs to handle. It traces a task from the CLI or MCP interface through to the actual analysis, looking for duplicate scans, repeated analysis, and large temporary buffers. It completes the same investigation before and after a change, comparing result correctness, the scope examined, and access to supporting information called Evidence.

When it helps

Use it to find why analysis is slow or review the design of caches, searches, and shared processing. Its checks include regressions on small inputs and the cost of cleanup. Measurements can also support a decision to keep the current implementation.

Example requests

  • “Measure the slow stages of this analysis and verify an improvement that preserves access to supporting evidence.”
  • “Review the cache keys, lifetime, and invalidation conditions.”

Notes

Work must follow the target environment’s rules, the analysis engine’s prerequisites, and the user’s authorization. This skill does not grant additional permission to execute, publish, or merge. CI and test-suite optimization belongs to rea-ci-tests-audit.

This overview was written by AI (OpenAI Codex) from the public SKILL.md. Check the original below for the exact behavior.

Objective evaluation

AI rated this skill on four points using only the contents of its SKILL.md. Stars and popularity are not taken into account.

Clear instructionsIs it clear when to use it and what it does?
AGoodIt identifies analysis bottlenecks and cache or query design as its scope, and explicitly assigns CI optimization to another skill.
Concrete stepsAre steps, inputs, outputs, and examples spelled out?
AGoodIt specifies independent correctness checks, phase measurements, cache conditions, before-and-after comparisons, and report contents.
SafetyAre sending data, deleting files, and running commands disclosed?
AGoodIt grants no additional execution, publication, or merge authority and requires isolated changes, resource limits, stopping before memory exhaustion, and cleanup.
Easy setupDoes it need few tools or API keys, and are they documented?
BPartly lackingIt requires following environment rules and analysis-engine prerequisites, but provides no environment setup steps itself.

The total counts each point as A = 25, B = 15, C = 5. Rated by AI (OpenAI Codex) as of Oct 19, 2026. Treat it as a guide and read the original before installing.

Disagree? Request a re-evaluation

Tell us which point is wrong and why. No login needed. We will check it against the SKILL.md, redo the evaluation, and show the result here.

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

Files included (3)

  • SKILL.md7.3 KB
  • agents/openai.yaml283 B
  • references/kuna-case-study.md6.4 KB

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

REA analysis optimization

Find a concrete source of unnecessary work, change it at its owner, and verify equivalent completed investigations. A useful outcome can also be a measured decision to leave an implementation alone.

Follow the checkout's performance priorities, tool design, and testing guide. This skill supplies an optimization workflow, not additional permission to execute targets, publish, or merge. Use the current contracts, provider prerequisites, and user authorization.

Read the Kuna case study when selecting a reuse strategy or interpreting a benchmark. Its pinned observations illustrate tradeoffs; they are not current-provider guarantees or universal speedups.

Pin the question and the correctness oracle

Describe the analyst's completed task, including the facts and relationships needed to answer it, requested detail, source access, and meaningful unknowns. Choose a representative real artifact and a small or empty case. Record the baseline revision, target digest, engine identity, options, host, and entrypoint. Use a separate checkout for changes without disturbing other work.

Establish an oracle independent of the changed implementation: source-built fixture expectations, independently mapped file bytes, or a native producer paired with checks of its interpretation. Comparing two wrappers around the same faulty decoder does not establish correctness. Preserve address widths, same-address alternatives, unresolved endpoints, coverage, and source linkage. An empty result proves absence only within the actually examined scope.

Locate the earliest unnecessary work

Trace one public CLI or MCP task through shared application code to its producer. Measure relevant phases: admission and identity checks, native analysis, decoding, lookup, projection, serialization, Evidence retention, and cleanup. Include catalog discovery and extra calls when they affect the completed task.

Use the evidence to choose the smallest structural correction:

Observed costCandidate correctionCondition to establish
Repeated scans of validated factsReuse existing order or lookup structureThe owner establishes ordering and identity; every matching alternative survives
Repeated equivalent engine workShare a validated result or in-flight producerInputs, freshness, lifetime, and per-caller outcomes remain explicit
Full reports for selected factsPush selection or projection to the earliest capable ownerRequired facts and evidence remain reachable; examined coverage is reported
Large temporary transport buffersDecode incrementally or use bounded source readsValidate the whole admitted document; retained facts and copies still consume memory
Many repeated homogeneous readsShare admission, decoding, or batch workPreserve item identity, order where required, and individual failures

Do not introduce an index, generic cache, batch endpoint, or orchestration layer without identifying the work it removes and its maintenance/resource cost. Projection after materializing a full report may reduce output while leaving analysis time and peak memory unchanged. Fix missing or incorrect facts before benchmarking an alternative composition against a better-covered workflow.

Keep one interpretation and a defined reuse lifetime

Let the producer boundary validate and normalize facts once. Consumers query that representation through the shared CLI/MCP implementation; adapters should not rebuild relationships or independently reinterpret raw reports. Keep lookup identity separate from display formatting. Reuse contracts when their intent matches, honoring requested detail and complete Evidence access.

For every cache or shared producer, state its key, owner, invalidation, retained size, and lifetime. Account for result-affecting target bytes, engine contents, analysis options, architecture/load mapping, and parser/schema versions where they affect reuse. Validate live state before calling a cached observation current. Cache a refusal only when it is deterministic for that validated key; malformed, partial, transient, or cancelled attempts need explicit retry policy.

One cancelled waiter must not invalidate a successful peer. Preserve producer failure context and each caller's cancellation reason. Retain ownership and capacity charges until shared work and cleanup settle; preserve completed observations when cleanup fails. Exercise invalidation, concurrent consumers, last-waiter cancellation, close, and cleanup retry when those paths change.

Bound the process family and retained state, not just a parent heap or worker count. Account for decoding and serialization expansion before allocation. Choose CPU, memory, concurrency, and disk limits from the host and workload; stop before OOM and verify owned cleanup. A guard-stopped task is incomplete. Do not replace a transport buffer cap with an unbounded retained inventory or hide partial results behind a success status.

Compare completed tasks and limit the claim

Run the affected real public workflow before and after with equivalent inputs, results, coverage, and Evidence semantics. Include small inputs so setup costs and regressions are visible. Distinguish fresh sessions, warm runtime caches, and OS file caches. Alternate or repeat runs when variance affects the decision. Choose meaningful boundary regressions for cases the actual engine cannot reliably reproduce; a fake engine does not qualify a real provider.

Report task outcome, relevant phase timings, total elapsed and CPU time, peak process-family memory and its accounting method, resource stops, and cleanup. Check the payload exit status as well as the profiler's. Keep failed attempts and identify unmeasured costs; a passing retry does not explain a failure.

For token claims, count schemas/discovery, arguments, replies, retries, and continuations needed to finish the task. Label tokenizer estimates separately from actual model usage and record the client/catalog behavior. Smaller JSON alone establishes neither fewer model tokens nor better investigation quality. Do not claim a complex-software advantage without completed representative investigations and comparable correctness/coverage.

Finish with the bottleneck, owning change, preserved semantics, executed checks, before/after measurements, and remaining limits. Keep any integration record current with its tested revision and distinguish merged production work from experiment-only code. Stop when the demonstrated bottleneck is resolved or further benefit remains speculative.

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

rea-changelog-update

FreeSummaryAI rating 90

Prepare REA changelogs and GitHub release notes from a fixed Git revision. Turn verified changes into clear user outcomes, preserve accurate contributor credit, and keep the release text aligned with Release Please, the automated release workflow.

  • Drafting release notes from Git history
  • Rewriting changes around their impact on users
  • Verifying contributor credit and issue links
morluto/rea323.8KUpdated Oct 19, 2026

rea-ci-tests-audit

FreeSummaryAI rating 90

Audit REA’s automated checks and test suites to find missed failures, outdated test data, and unnecessary work. Use reproducible experiments and timing measurements to assess fixes or efficiency changes while preserving checks that catch real defects.

  • Investigating CI checks that pass despite defects
  • Checking whether test data matches current behavior
  • Measuring unnecessary work in slow test suites
morluto/rea323.8KUpdated Oct 19, 2026

rea-tool-design

FreeSummaryAI rating 80

Design or change REA investigation tools by defining responsibilities, inputs, results, and CLI or MCP interfaces. Produce a proposal that explains how Evidence records should be interpreted, compares the nearest existing alternative, and outlines verification.

  • Designing a new REA investigation tool
  • Reviewing CLI or MCP inputs and results
  • Defining provider responsibilities and Evidence meaning
morluto/rea323.8KUpdated Oct 19, 2026

reverse-engineer-anything

FreeSummaryAI rating 90

Investigate shipped applications, binaries, packages, and firmware with REA to explain features, compare versions, or guide reconstruction. Use decompiled code and runtime observations where needed, keeping observed facts, inferred behavior, and unresolved questions clearly separated.

  • Explaining features in a shipped application
  • Comparing behavior across application versions
  • Inspecting binaries and packaged resources
morluto/rea323.8KUpdated Oct 19, 2026

See all skills by morluto

Report a problem with this skill