본문으로 건너뛰기
cccskills
무료GitHub에 공개

data-dictionary

Generate a data dictionary documenting entities, fields, and business rules. Use when the user says "data dictionary", "document the data model", "what fields are in this table", "data definitions", "field descriptions", "CRUD matrix", "entity relationship", "data catalogue", "what data does this system store" - even if they don't explicitly say "data dictionary".

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

설치 방법 보기

포함된 파일(2)

  • SKILL.md5.9 KB
  • references/data-dictionary-template.md3.1 KB

SKILL.md(원문)

설치하기 전에 에이전트에게 전달되는 지시 내용을 확인할 수 있습니다.

Reference Files

  • references/data-dictionary-template.md - Template table with all standard columns (field name, description, data type, format, valid values, source, owner, business rules, nullable, example). Read this in Step 3 when documenting individual entities.

Overview

Based on the BABOK Guide v3 (IIBA) - Data Dictionary technique, which defines a data dictionary as a structured repository of data element definitions that eliminates ambiguity about what data means, where it comes from, and who owns it. Also draws on Business Analysis Techniques by James Cadle for Entity-Relationship Diagrams, CRUD Matrix, and Data Dictionary best practices. The key insight: a data dictionary is not a database schema dump. It is a business-facing document that defines what each data element means in business terms, who is the authoritative source, and what rules govern its values.

Workflow

Step 1: Identify data sources and scope

SYSTEM(S): [which systems are in scope]
PURPOSE: [why this data dictionary is being created - new build, migration, integration, audit]
AUDIENCE: [who will use this - developers, testers, business users, auditors]
SOURCES: [where to get the data definitions - database schemas, APIs, existing docs, SMEs]

Step 2: List entities and relationships

Identify the key business entities and how they relate:

| Entity | Description | Relationships |
|--------|-------------|---------------|
| Customer | A person or organization that purchases products | Has many Orders; Belongs to one Segment |
| Order | A purchase transaction | Belongs to one Customer; Has many Line Items |
| Product | An item available for sale | Appears in many Line Items |

Draw or describe the Entity-Relationship model: cardinality (1:1, 1:N, M:N), mandatory vs. optional.

Step 3: Document each entity's fields

For each entity, use the template from references/data-dictionary-template.md:

ENTITY: [name]

| Field | Description | Type | Format | Valid Values | Source | Nullable | Business Rules |
|-------|-------------|------|--------|-------------|--------|----------|---------------|
| customer_id | Unique identifier | UUID | xxxxxxxx-xxxx | System-generated | [system] | No | Immutable after creation |
| email | Primary contact email | String | name@domain.com | Valid email format | User input | No | Must be unique per customer |
| status | Account status | Enum | - | active, suspended, closed | [system] | No | Can only transition: active->suspended->closed |

Step 4: Build the CRUD matrix

Map which functions Create, Read, Update, or Delete each entity:

| Entity / Function | Registration | Order Mgmt | Reporting | Admin |
|-------------------|-------------|------------|-----------|-------|
| Customer | C, R | R | R | C, R, U, D |
| Order | - | C, R, U | R | R, U, D |
| Product | - | R | R | C, R, U, D |

This reveals: which functions are authoritative (C), which are consumers (R only), and where delete authority sits.

Step 5: Document data lineage

For shared or derived fields, trace the data path:

FIELD: total_revenue (Reporting Dashboard)
SOURCE: orders.line_items.unit_price * orders.line_items.quantity
TRANSFORMATION: Sum by customer_id, grouped by month
REFRESH: Daily batch at 02:00 UTC
AUTHORITATIVE SOURCE: Order Management System

Step 6: Identify data quality rules

For each critical field:

FIELD: [name]
QUALITY RULE: [validation, format, range, uniqueness, referential integrity]
CURRENT QUALITY: [% compliant if known]
REMEDIATION: [what to do when data violates the rule]

Step 7: Output the data dictionary

Deliver: entity list with relationships, field-level definitions per entity, CRUD matrix, data lineage for derived/shared fields, and data quality rules.

Anti-Patterns

1. Database schema dump labeled as a data dictionary Bad: Exporting column names and data types from the database and calling it done. Good: Each field has a business description, valid values, source system, and business rules.

2. Technical descriptions only Bad: "VARCHAR(255), NOT NULL" (That's the schema, not the dictionary.) Good: "Customer's primary email address. Used for order confirmations and password reset. Must be unique per customer account."

3. No ownership or source attribution Bad: Field definitions without noting which system is the authoritative source. Good: Every field traces to its source system and data owner. When systems disagree, the authoritative source is explicit.

4. Static document that's never updated Bad: Data dictionary written at project start, never maintained. Good: Data dictionary is a living document updated whenever entities, fields, or rules change. Version-controlled.

5. Missing CRUD matrix Bad: Field definitions without documenting which functions interact with each entity. Good: CRUD matrix reveals who creates, reads, updates, and deletes each entity - critical for integration and security design.

Quality Checklist

  • Scope and purpose defined (which systems, why, for whom)
  • All entities listed with business descriptions and relationships
  • Every field has: name, description, type, format, valid values, source, nullable flag
  • Business rules documented per field (not just data types)
  • CRUD matrix completed for all entities and functions
  • Data lineage documented for derived or shared fields
  • Authoritative source identified for each entity
  • Data quality rules defined for critical fields
  • Descriptions are in business language, not just technical notation

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

Rate any product, feature, or experience on the 11-star scale (Brian Chesky's Airbnb thought experiment). Use when user says "rate this experience", "11-star", "star rating", "experience audit", "how good is this", "experience rating", "product audit", "quality assessment", or wants to evaluate product quality and identify improvement paths. Also trigger when user wants to benchmark a feature, assess where a product stands, or map out what "great" looks like - even if they don't explicitly say "11-star".

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

qa-aman/claude-skills212026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Generate A/B copy variants grounded in Eugene Schwartz's awareness and market-sophistication stages and John Caples' tested-headline discipline. Every variant declares its angle, the awareness stage it targets, and a falsifiable hypothesis, and the skill recommends which pair to test first and what delta counts as signal. Use when the user says "A/B test this", "write variants", "give me options", "test different angles", "copy variants", "ab copy", "test this headline", "multiple versions", "which version is better", or wants to test copy before publishing. For reviewing copy that already exists, see copy-review. For sample size and stopping rules, see growth-experiment. For diagnosing a page rather than its words, see page-cro. For full paid ad sets by platform, see ad-campaign-writer.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

qa-aman/claude-skills212026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Design statistically rigorous experiments to test data science hypotheses. Use when the user says "design an A/B test", "run an experiment", "test this hypothesis", "is this difference significant", "how many samples do I need", "randomized controlled trial", "causal inference", "uplift test", "holdout group", "significance test", "power calculation", "avoid p-hacking", or needs to determine whether an observed effect is real before making a product or model decision. For lean build-measure-learn product experiments without the statistics, use experiment-design instead.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

qa-aman/claude-skills212026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Write measurable acceptance criteria for requirements or user stories. Use when the user says "write acceptance criteria", "definition of done", "how do we test this", "fit criteria", "given when then", "Gherkin scenarios", "what does done look like", "testable conditions", "how will we know this works" - even if they don't explicitly say "acceptance criteria".

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

qa-aman/claude-skills212026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Build a strategic account plan for winning, retaining, or expanding a named account. Use when the user says "build an account plan", "strategic account planning", "how do I grow this account", "account expansion strategy", "whitespace analysis", "QBR prep", "key account review", "map the stakeholders in this account", "land and expand plan", "how do I break into [company]", or wants a structured strategy for a specific account.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

qa-aman/claude-skills212026년 10월 19일 업데이트

Write paid ad copy for LinkedIn, Google, Meta, and YouTube. Produces multiple variants per platform, each targeting a different Eugene Schwartz awareness level and Cialdini persuasion principle. Use when the user asks for ad copy, ad variants, "write LinkedIn ads", Google ads, Meta ads, paid social copy, ad headlines, or wants creative for a paid campaign. Reads brand voice, ICP, and positioning from knowledge/. For organic social posts, see linkedin-post or social-calendar. For the landing page the ad points at, see landing-page-writer. For testing variants, see ab-copy-writer.

한국어 요약은 준비 중입니다. 원문 설명을 표시하고 있습니다.

qa-aman/claude-skills212026년 10월 19일 업데이트

qa-aman의 스킬 모두 보기

이 스킬의 문제 신고