本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

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".

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(2)

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

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

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

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".

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。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

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.

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。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

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".

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。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

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.

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。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

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.

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。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

Design clean and consistent APIs. Use when the user says "design an API", "API design review", "design these endpoints", "REST API for X", "GraphQL schema", "API contract", "how should this endpoint work", "review my API design", or wants to create or improve an API interface - even if they don't explicitly say "API design".

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。

qa-aman/claude-skills202026年9月10日 更新

qa-aman のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する