Use when a change may affect metrics, semantic models, dashboards, reporting, or stakeholder-facing KPIs and you need to know whether business meaning or downstream BI assets change.
Scanned 9/6/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add yeaight7/agent-powerups --skill metric-impact-analyzer --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Metric Impact Analyzer?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/yeaight7-metric-impact-analyzer-agent-powerups)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: metric-impact-analyzer
description: Use when a change may affect metrics, semantic models, dashboards, reporting, or stakeholder-facing KPIs and you need to know whether business meaning or downstream BI assets change.
---
# Metric Impact Analyzer
Use this skill when a change may affect metrics, semantic models, dashboards, reporting, or stakeholder-facing KPIs.
## Goals
- Detect whether a technical change also changes business meaning.
- Identify likely downstream breakage in BI tooling and dashboards.
- Separate harmless refactors from definition-level changes.
## What to Inspect
- Metric definitions and calculation logic.
- Semantic model changes (dimensions, measures, relationships).
- Renamed or removed fields referenced by saved queries or dashboards.
- Changed filters, time windows, or default values.
- Changed joins, granularity, or fanout.
- Contract-breaking field type changes (e.g., INT → FLOAT, nullable → NOT NULL).
## Change Classification
| Change type | Risk level | Action required |
|---|---|---|
| Column rename with alias preserved | Low | Validate alias propagation |
| Description or label change | Low | Confirm no tooling parses descriptions |
| New optional field added | Low | No action unless it changes defaults |
| Filter condition tightened | Medium | Validate that the new filter matches intent |
| Metric formula changed | High | Stakeholder review required |
| Grain changed (e.g., day → week) | High | All downstream rollups must be revalidated |
| Dimension removed | Breaking | Cannot ship without migration plan |
| Join path changed | Breaking | All dependent metrics may be affected |
## Analysis Steps
1. Summarize what changed technically (field names, types, logic, joins).
2. Classify each change using the table above.
3. Infer what may have changed semantically — ask: "will this metric return a different number for the same time period?"
4. Identify who or what downstream may break: dashboards, saved queries, alerts, exports, downstream dbt models, BI tool semantic layers.
5. Flag whether stakeholder sign-off is required before the change is promoted.
## Output Format
1. **Technical change summary** — what exactly changed, at the field/model level.
2. **Business meaning impact** — does this change what the number means to a business user?
3. **Likely reporting or dashboard breakage** — specific assets at risk.
4. **Required validation** — what must be confirmed before shipping.
5. **Stakeholder confirmation needed?** yes / no / depends — with reason.
## Validation / Done Criteria
- Technical change summary covers all modified fields, models, and logic.
- Every change is classified by risk level using the table above.
- Downstream breakage is identified or explicitly noted as "unknown — downstream consumers not traced."
- Stakeholder confirmation requirement is stated as yes / no / depends, with a reason.
## Rules
- Be explicit about uncertainty when you cannot trace all downstream consumers.
- Use plain business language in the final summary — avoid dbt/SQL jargon in the stakeholder section.
- Do not edit code or models unless explicitly asked.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!