본문으로 건너뛰기
cccskills
무료GitHub에 공개

ai-engineer

Build production-ready LLM applications, advanced RAG systems, and intelligent agents. Implements vector search, multimodal AI, agent orchestration, and enterprise AI integrations. Use PROACTIVELY for LLM features, chatbots, AI agents, or AI-powered applications.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

설치 방법 보기

포함된 파일(1)

  • SKILL.md8.2 KB

SKILL.md(원문)

설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.

AI Engineer

Expert in building production-ready LLM applications, from simple chatbots to complex multi-agent systems. Specializes in RAG architectures, vector databases, prompt management, and enterprise AI deployments.

Decision Points

RAG Component Selection

Query Type Assessment:
├── Simple FAQ/Knowledge Lookup
│   ├── Document Count < 1000 → Chroma + text-embedding-3-small
│   └── Document Count > 1000 → Pinecone + text-embedding-3-large
├── Technical/Code Documentation  
│   ├── Budget Constrained → bge-large + pgvector
│   └── Performance Critical → voyage-2 + Weaviate
└── Conversational/Multi-turn
    ├── Memory Required → Agent pattern + context management
    └── Stateless → Standard RAG pipeline

Reranking Decision:
├── Precision Critical (legal, medical) → Always use Cohere Rerank
├── Latency < 200ms → Skip reranking, tune retrieval
├── Budget Constrained → Cross-encoder (bge-reranker-large)
└── Default → Cohere Rerank with top-10 → top-3

Database Selection:
├── Existing Postgres → pgvector extension
├── Need Hybrid Search → Weaviate or Qdrant
├── Managed Service → Pinecone
└── Self-hosted/Local → Chroma or Qdrant

Model Routing Strategy

Complexity Assessment:
├── Keywords Only (FAQ) → Claude Haiku
├── Single Document Reference → Claude Sonnet  
├── Multi-document Synthesis → Claude Opus
└── Code Generation → Claude Sonnet with tools

Token Budget Check:
├── < 1K tokens → Any model
├── 1K-4K tokens → Sonnet/GPT-4
├── 4K-32K tokens → Claude Opus
└── > 32K tokens → Chunk and summarize first

Agent vs RAG Decision

Task Classification:
├── Static Knowledge Query → Pure RAG
├── Need External APIs → Agent with tools
├── Multi-step Reasoning → Agent with planning
├── Real-time Data Required → Agent with live tools
└── Simple Q&A → RAG with fallback to agent

Failure Modes

Semantic Mismatch Cascade

Symptoms: Good retrieval precision but poor answer relevance, users say "close but not quite right" Detection Rule: If semantic similarity > 0.8 but user satisfaction < 60% Root Cause: Query and document embeddings optimized for different semantic spaces Fix: Switch to domain-specific embedding model or implement query expansion with synonyms

Context Window Overflow

Symptoms: Responses become generic, model ignores specific retrieved context, inconsistent answers Detection Rule: If context utilization ratio < 30% and response generality score > 0.7 Root Cause: Too many irrelevant chunks diluting relevant information Fix: Implement stricter relevance threshold (>0.8) and dynamic context selection

Tool Hallucination Loop

Symptoms: Agent makes up API calls, references non-existent functions, infinite retry cycles Detection Rule: If tool call success rate < 50% or iteration count > max_iterations * 0.8 Root Cause: Model trained on different tool schemas than implementation Fix: Add tool validation layer and explicit error handling in agent system prompt

Embedding Drift Degradation

Symptoms: Gradual decline in retrieval quality over time, seasonal performance drops Detection Rule: If monthly average retrieval@5 drops > 10% from baseline Root Cause: Domain language evolves but embedding model remains static Fix: Implement embedding model retraining pipeline or switch to adaptive embeddings

Response Latency Creep

Symptoms: P95 latency increases gradually, user complaints about slow responses Detection Rule: If P95 response time > 2x baseline for 7 consecutive days Root Cause: Vector index degradation, context size inflation, or model endpoint saturation Fix: Implement index optimization schedule, context pruning, and multi-model load balancing

Worked Examples

Example: Customer Support Chatbot Implementation

Initial Requirements: "Build a chatbot that can answer questions about our 500-page product documentation"

Step 1: Architecture Decision

  • Document count: 500 pages → Use Pinecone for scalability
  • Query type: Mixed FAQ + troubleshooting → Hybrid search needed
  • Latency requirement: < 3 seconds → Include reranking but optimize

Step 2: Implementation Walkthrough

// Novice approach - would use basic similarity search
const chunks = await vectorDb.query(queryEmbedding, { topK: 5 });

// Expert approach - considers relevance thresholds
const rawChunks = await vectorDb.query(queryEmbedding, { 
  topK: 20, 
  threshold: 0.7  // Ensure minimum relevance
});

// Expert adds reranking step novice would skip
const reranked = await reranker.rank(query, rawChunks);
const finalChunks = reranked.slice(0, 3);

// Expert includes fallback handling
if (finalChunks.length === 0) {
  return await fallbackToGeneralSupport(query);
}

Step 3: Performance Optimization Discovery

  • Initial P95 latency: 4.2 seconds (above requirement)
  • Analysis: 60% of time spent in reranking
  • Trade-off Decision: Switch from Cohere Rerank to local cross-encoder
  • Result: P95 latency → 2.1 seconds, slight quality drop (92% → 89% satisfaction)
  • Expert Insight: For support use case, speed > perfect accuracy

Step 4: Failure Scenario Handling

  • Discovered 15% of queries were about features not in documentation
  • Novice: Would return "I don't know"
  • Expert: Added escalation detection and handoff to human agent

Final Architecture: Pinecone + local reranker + agent escalation = 89% automation rate at 2.1s P95

Quality Gates

  • Retrieval@5 accuracy > 85% on evaluation dataset
  • Average response latency < 3 seconds for P95
  • Context utilization ratio > 60% (model uses retrieved information)
  • Hallucination rate < 5% (responses not supported by retrieved context)
  • User satisfaction score > 80% over 30-day rolling window
  • Token cost per query < predefined budget threshold
  • System uptime > 99.9% excluding planned maintenance
  • PII detection rate > 95% (no personal info in responses)
  • Embedding model performance stable (no >10% monthly degradation)
  • Error handling covers all failure modes with graceful degradation

Not-For Boundaries

Do NOT use this skill for:

Prompt Engineering Tasks → Use prompt-engineer instead

  • Optimizing prompt templates and instructions
  • A/B testing prompt variations
  • Chain-of-thought prompt design

ML Model Training/Fine-tuning → Use ml-engineer instead

  • Training custom embedding models
  • Fine-tuning LLMs on domain data
  • Model architecture research

Data Pipeline Engineering → Use data-pipeline-engineer instead

  • ETL processes for training data
  • Data validation and cleaning workflows
  • Batch processing systems

Infrastructure/DevOps → Use backend-architect instead

  • Kubernetes deployment strategies
  • Database optimization and sharding
  • Load balancer configuration

Analytics and Monitoring Setup → Use chatbot-analytics instead

  • Conversation flow analysis
  • User behavior tracking
  • Performance dashboard creation

Delegate When:

  • Task requires deep ML expertise → ml-engineer
  • Focus is on conversation design → prompt-engineer
  • Need infrastructure scaling → backend-architect
  • Want usage analytics → chatbot-analytics
  • Building non-AI features → Relevant specialist skill

리뷰

아직 리뷰가 없습니다. 사용해 본 소감을 남겨 주세요.

댓글

로그인 없이 쓸 수 있습니다. 사용 후기, 질문, 작동하지 않은 환경 등을 편하게 남겨 주세요.

아직 댓글이 없습니다. 첫 댓글을 남겨 보세요.

보내면 바로 공개됩니다. 이메일 주소나 전화번호 같은 개인 정보는 쓰지 마세요. URL은 2개까지입니다.

0 / 1,000자

이 양식은 reCAPTCHA로 보호되며 Google 개인정보처리방침 및 서비스 약관이 적용됩니다.

같은 저장소의 스킬

Expert in 2000s-era music visualization (Milkdrop, AVS, Geiss) and modern WebGL implementations. Specializes in Butterchurn integration, Web Audio API AnalyserNode FFT data, GLSL shaders for audio-reactive visuals, and psychedelic generative art. Activate on "Milkdrop", "music visualization", "WebGL visualizer", "Butterchurn", "audio reactive", "FFT visualization", "spectrum analyzer". NOT for simple bar charts/waveforms (use basic canvas), video editing, or non-audio visuals.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

curiositech/windags-skills162026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Expert legal research agent for finding and scraping expungement data state by state. Knows authoritative sources, URL patterns, Firecrawl configuration, and 2026 legal landscape.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

curiositech/windags-skills162026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Expert in 3D computer vision labeling tools, workflows, and AI-assisted annotation for LiDAR, point clouds, and sensor fusion. Covers SAM4D/Point-SAM, human-in-the-loop architectures, and vertical-specific training strategies. Activate on '3D labeling', 'point cloud annotation', 'LiDAR labeling', 'SAM 3D', 'SAM4D', 'sensor fusion annotation', '3D bounding box', 'semantic segmentation point cloud'. NOT for 2D image labeling (use clip-aware-embeddings), general ML training (use ml-engineer), video annotation without 3D (use computer-vision-pipeline), or VLM prompt engineering (use prompt-engineer).

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

curiositech/windags-skills162026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Apply crisis decision-making research to agent routing, uncertainty triage, and coordination failure analysis in time-pressured systems. Use when diagnosing handoff failures, analytical paralysis, or expert judgment under incomplete information. NOT for routine coding, simple CRUD design, or static single-agent tasks with complete information.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

curiositech/windags-skills162026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Use for insight, reframing, contradiction, impasse, and anomaly-driven problem solving when execution effort no longer helps. NOT for routine optimization, error correction, or well-specified tasks with known solution paths.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

curiositech/windags-skills162026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Apply normative BDI reasoning to agents that must detect norms, choose which commitments to internalize, and resolve conflicts by comparing consequences. Use when obligations, prohibitions, or policies collide in autonomous systems. NOT for simple fixed-priority rules, pure constraint satisfaction, or domains where no real normative conflict exists.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

curiositech/windags-skills162026년 10월 19일 업데이트

curiositech의 스킬 모두 보기

이 스킬의 문제 신고