logix-perf-observability-loop

Maps performance requirements to runtime owner paths, pressure knobs, counters, and CI artifact gates.

4|1|Updated Dec 11, 2025
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/yoyooyooo/logix --skill logix-perf-observability-loop
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: logix-perf-observability-loop
Source: https://github.com/yoyooyooo/logix/tree/main/.codex/skills/logix-perf-observability-loop
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/yoyooyooo/logix --skill logix-perf-observability-loop

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill includes references (resource) components.

What problem does it solve?

This Skill prevents performance work from becoming guesswork by forcing every optimization effort to map requirements to runtime owners, pressure knobs, required counters, and the correct CI artifact evidence chain before making hard claims.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Performance planning with owner/knob/counter mapping: Converts a requirement into a specific runtime owner path, pressure knobs, expected counter movement, forbidden migration targets, and a CI evidence plan.
  • Artifact-first analysis and classification: Guides analysis of CI outputs (structure, knob snapshots, trend, convergence, soak) to determine comparability, missing counters, regressions, timeouts, and stability warnings without jumping to conclusions.
  • Small-step implementation discipline: Structures implementation into one pressure knob and one owner/cost claim per step, pairing local verification with the next required snapshot/trend/convergence gates.

Quick Start

Tell the agent that you have a performance-affecting change and want it planned with owner path, pressure knobs, required counters, and the exact CI artifact gates you must collect before claiming improvements.

Frequently Asked Questions about logix-perf-observability-loop

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I map performance requirements to CI artifacts and runtime owners?

Map performance requirements to CI artifacts and runtime owners by converting requirements into specific runtime owner paths, pressure knobs, expected counter movement, and a CI evidence plan before making optimization claims.

What is the best way to triage performance regressions using CI outputs?

Triage performance regressions by analyzing CI outputs to determine artifact comparability, missing counters, timeouts, and stability warnings, enforcing strict claim boundaries and artifact comparability checks before attributing regressions.

How do I handle missing counters or timeouts during convergence gating?

Handle missing counters or timeouts during convergence gating by applying counter three-state handling to evaluate missing, zero, or greater-than-zero states, triggering evidence fixes or re-collection before proceeding with runtime optimizations.

Can I plan performance optimizations with pressure knobs and cost claims?

Plan performance optimizations with pressure knobs by structuring implementation into one pressure knob and one owner cost claim per step, pairing local verification with the next required snapshot, trend, or convergence gates.

Why do I need artifact comparability checks for performance trend analysis?

Artifact comparability checks for performance trend analysis are needed to prevent jumping to conclusions, ensuring same-branch trend analysis and soak evaluations rely on structurally comparable CI artifacts before enforcing convergence gates.

When should I not claim a performance improvement from CI artifacts?

Do not claim a performance improvement from CI artifacts when required counters are missing, timeouts occur, stability warnings appear, or artifact comparability checks fail, triggering safe next-step decisions like re-collection instead.