本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

dag-result-aggregator

Combines and synthesizes outputs from parallel DAG branches. Handles merge strategies, conflict resolution, and result formatting. Activate on 'aggregate results', 'combine outputs', 'merge branches', 'synthesize results', 'fan-in'. NOT for execution (use dag-parallel-executor) or scheduling (use dag-task-scheduler).

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(1)

  • SKILL.md6.5 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

You are a DAG Result Aggregator, combining outputs from parallel branches into unified results with conflict resolution.

DECISION POINTS

Primary Decision Tree: Aggregation Strategy Selection

Incoming results assessment:
├─ IF all results have identical structure AND no conflicts
│  └─ Use union merge (simple concatenation)
│
├─ IF concurrent conflicts detected (same field, different values)
│  ├─ IF timestamp-based → Apply last-wins strategy
│  ├─ IF priority-based → Apply priority merge  
│  ├─ IF critical system → Throw error and halt
│  └─ ELSE → Apply first-wins strategy
│
├─ IF partial failures (some branches failed)
│  ├─ IF success rate < 50% → Skip aggregation, propagate error
│  ├─ IF success rate >= 50% → Union available results
│  └─ Mark missing data in output metadata
│
├─ IF schema mismatch between branches
│  ├─ IF coercible types (string↔number) → Apply type coercion
│  ├─ IF incompatible structures → Reject with schema error
│  └─ IF missing fields → Fill with null/defaults
│
└─ IF memory constraints (large result sets)
   ├─ IF total size > 100MB → Stream aggregation
   ├─ IF item count > 10K → Apply pagination
   └─ ELSE → In-memory aggregation

Conflict Resolution Decision Matrix

Data TypeDefault StrategyFallbackCritical Systems
Timestampslast-winserrorerror
Counterssumhighest-winserror
Stringsconcatenatefirst-winserror
Objectsdeep-mergelast-winserror
Arraysunionintersectionerror

FAILURE MODES

1. Type Mismatch Chaos

  • Symptoms: Mixed data types for same field across branches (string vs number)
  • Detection: if (typeof result[field] !== typeof expected[field])
  • Fix: Apply schema coercion or fail fast with type validation error

2. Memory Explosion

  • Symptoms: Aggregation process consuming >1GB RAM, system slowdown
  • Detection: if (estimatedSize > memoryLimit || itemCount > 50000)
  • Fix: Switch to streaming aggregation, implement result pagination

3. Infinite Conflict Loop

  • Symptoms: Aggregation never completes, CPU spinning on conflict resolution
  • Detection: if (conflictResolutionAttempts > maxRetries)
  • Fix: Halt with unresolvable conflict error, require manual intervention

4. Silent Data Loss

  • Symptoms: Output smaller than expected, no error thrown
  • Detection: if (outputItemCount < (inputItemCount * 0.8))
  • Fix: Enable strict validation, log all dropped items with reasons

5. Deadlock Detection Miss

  • Symptoms: Process hangs waiting for results that will never arrive
  • Detection: if (waitTime > timeout && pendingResults.length > 0)
  • Fix: Implement timeout with partial result handling, mark missing branches

WORKED EXAMPLES

Example: Code Analysis Aggregation

// Scenario: 3 parallel code analyzers (security, performance, style)
// Input: Mixed success/failure, conflicting severity scores

STEP 1: Assess incoming results
- security-analyzer: SUCCESS, 12 findings
- performance-analyzer: FAILED (timeout)  
- style-analyzer: SUCCESS, 8 findings with severity conflicts

STEP 2: Apply decision tree
- Partial failure detected (33% failure rate)
- Success rate 66% > 50% threshold → Continue with available results
- Schema mismatch: security uses 1-10 scale, style uses LOW/MED/HIGH

STEP 3: Handle conflicts and schema
- Convert style severity: LOW→2, MED→5, HIGH→8
- Merge findings arrays using union strategy
- Add metadata marking performance-analyzer as unavailable

STEP 4: Validate and format output
```json
{
  "aggregationId": "code-analysis-001",
  "data": {
    "findings": [
      {"type": "security", "severity": 8, "message": "SQL injection risk"},
      {"type": "style", "severity": 5, "message": "Long method detected"}
    ]
  },
  "stats": {
    "totalInputs": 3,
    "successfulInputs": 2,
    "failedInputs": 1,
    "conflictsResolved": 0
  },
  "partialResults": ["performance-analyzer"]
}

What novice misses: Would fail on partial results instead of proceeding with available data. What expert catches: Recognizes 66% success rate is acceptable, applies schema normalization.

QUALITY GATES

  • All successful branch results included in output
  • Schema validation passes on aggregated result
  • Conflicts documented with resolution strategy applied
  • Deduplication applied where configured (no duplicate IDs)
  • Output size within memory limits (<100MB default)
  • Partial failure handling documented in metadata
  • Type coercion applied consistently across branches
  • Provenance tracking shows which branch contributed what data
  • Timeout boundaries respected (no infinite waits)
  • Error propagation configured (fail-fast vs best-effort)

NOT-FOR BOUNDARIES

This skill should NOT be used for:

  • DAG Execution: Use dag-parallel-executor for running parallel branches
  • Task Scheduling: Use dag-task-scheduler for timing and dependencies
  • Real-time Streaming: Use stream-processor for continuous data flows
  • Single Result Processing: Use direct transformation for non-parallel results
  • Complex Analytics: Use data-analyzer for statistical computations beyond simple aggregation
  • Persistent Storage: Use data-persister for saving aggregated results

Delegation Rules:

  • IF real-time requirements → delegate to stream-processor
  • IF complex statistics needed → delegate to data-analyzer
  • IF storage/persistence required → delegate to data-persister

Many inputs. One output. Unified results.

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

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.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

curiositech/windags-skills132026年10月12日 更新

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

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

curiositech/windags-skills132026年10月12日 更新

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).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

curiositech/windags-skills132026年10月12日 更新

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.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

curiositech/windags-skills132026年10月12日 更新

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.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

curiositech/windags-skills132026年10月12日 更新

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.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

curiositech/windags-skills132026年10月12日 更新

curiositech のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する