data-validation-join-explosion
Sub-skill of data-validation: Join Explosion (+6).
Best use case
data-validation-join-explosion is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
Sub-skill of data-validation: Join Explosion (+6).
Teams using data-validation-join-explosion should expect a more consistent output, faster repeated execution, less prompt rewriting.
When to use this skill
- You want a reusable workflow that can be run more than once with consistent structure.
When not to use this skill
- You only need a quick one-off answer and do not need a reusable workflow.
- You cannot install or maintain the underlying files, dependencies, or repository context.
Installation
Claude Code / Cursor / Codex
Manual Installation
- Download SKILL.md from GitHub
- Place it in
.claude/skills/join-explosion/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How data-validation-join-explosion Compares
| Feature / Agent | data-validation-join-explosion | Standard Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Platform Support | Not specified | Limited / Varies |
| Context Awareness | High | Baseline |
| Installation Complexity | Unknown | N/A |
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this skill do?
Sub-skill of data-validation: Join Explosion (+6).
Where can I find the source code?
You can find the source code on GitHub using the link provided at the top of the page.
SKILL.md Source
# Join Explosion (+6) ## Join Explosion **The problem**: A many-to-many join silently multiplies rows, inflating counts and sums. **How to detect**: ```sql -- Check row count before and after join SELECT COUNT(*) FROM table_a; -- 1,000 SELECT COUNT(*) FROM table_a a JOIN table_b b ON a.id = b.a_id; -- 3,500 (uh oh) ``` **How to prevent**: - Always check row counts after joins - If counts increase, investigate the join relationship (is it really 1:1 or 1:many?) - Use `COUNT(DISTINCT a.id)` instead of `COUNT(*)` when counting entities through joins ## Survivorship Bias **The problem**: Analyzing only entities that exist today, ignoring those that were deleted, churned, or failed. **Examples**: - Analyzing user behavior of "current users" misses churned users - Looking at "companies using our product" ignores those who evaluated and left - Studying properties of "successful" outcomes without "unsuccessful" ones **How to prevent**: Ask "who is NOT in this dataset?" before drawing conclusions. ## Incomplete Period Comparison **The problem**: Comparing a partial period to a full period. **Examples**: - "January revenue is $500K vs. December's $800K" -- but January isn't over yet - "This week's signups are down" -- checked on Wednesday, comparing to a full prior week **How to prevent**: Always filter to complete periods, or compare same-day-of-month / same-number-of-days. ## Denominator Shifting **The problem**: The denominator changes between periods, making rates incomparable. **Examples**: - Conversion rate improves because you changed how you count "eligible" users - Churn rate changes because the definition of "active" was updated **How to prevent**: Use consistent definitions across all compared periods. Note any definition changes. ## Average of Averages **The problem**: Averaging pre-computed averages gives wrong results when group sizes differ. **Example**: - Group A: 100 users, average revenue $50 - Group B: 10 users, average revenue $200 - Wrong: Average of averages = ($50 + $200) / 2 = $125 - Right: Weighted average = (100*$50 + 10*$200) / 110 = $63.64 **How to prevent**: Always aggregate from raw data. Never average pre-aggregated averages. ## Timezone Mismatches **The problem**: Different data sources use different timezones, causing misalignment. **Examples**: - Event timestamps in UTC vs. user-facing dates in local time - Daily rollups that use different cutoff times **How to prevent**: Standardize all timestamps to a single timezone (UTC recommended) before analysis. Document the timezone used. ## Selection Bias in Segmentation **The problem**: Segments are defined by the outcome you're measuring, creating circular logic. **Examples**: - "Users who completed onboarding have higher retention" -- obviously, they self-selected - "Power users generate more revenue" -- they became power users BY generating revenue **How to prevent**: Define segments based on pre-treatment characteristics, not outcomes.
Related Skills
data-validation-reporter
Generate interactive validation reports with quality scoring, missing data analysis, and type checking. Combines Pandas validation, Plotly visualization, and YAML configuration for comprehensive data quality reporting.
worldenergydata-source-readiness
Route agents to the canonical worldenergydata source-readiness skill and summary script. Use when asked for worldenergydata data completeness, data locations, latest known data dates, scheduler freshness, source-readiness status, or acceptance-criteria inputs across the repo ecosystem.
sodir-data-extractor
Extract and process Norwegian Petroleum Directorate field and production data from SODIR
metocean-data-fetcher
Fetch real-time and historical metocean data from NDBC, CO-OPS, Open-Meteo, ERDDAP, and MET Norway. Use for buoy data retrieval, tidal observations, marine forecasts, and multi-source data fusion.
energy-data-visualizer
Interactive visualization for oil and gas production data analysis using Plotly dashboards
bsee-data-extractor
Extract and process BSEE (Bureau of Safety and Environmental Enforcement) data including production, WAR (Well Activity Reports), and APD (Application for Permit to Drill) data. Use for querying production data, well activities, drilling permits, completions, and workovers by API number, block, lease, or field with automatic data normalization and caching.
gtm-demo-validation-cache-regression-repair
Diagnose and repair GTM demo validation failures caused by legacy cache files missing intermediate chart data, especially in nested digitalmodel demo scripts using --from-cache.
tax-return-data-capture-and-archival
Capture structured tax return summaries as YAML for year-over-year comparison, with fallback to manual PDF download and relocation when automation fails
repo-separation-for-sensitive-data
Architecture pattern for splitting confidential data and reusable algorithms across repos
plan-gated-issue-validation-workflow
Systematic validation pattern for plan-approved GitHub issues with pre-existing deliverables
metadata-only-wiki-sweep-workflow
Disciplined inventory process for cataloging documents by filename/path without content claims, using parent-centric grouping to prevent stub proliferation
metadata-only-inventory-sweep
Execute constrained file inventory sweeps with metadata-only stubs and validation, useful for staged documentation work on large file sets