agentsclimarketplace

Rag architect

Skill alirezarezvani/claude-skills/engineering/skills/rag-architect

345 Claude Code skills & agent skills & plugins (30+ Agents, 70+ custom commands, 330+ skills, customizable references, scripts)for Claude Code, Codex, Gemini CLI, Cursor, and 8 more coding agents — engineering, marketing, product, compliance, C-level advisory, research, business operations, commercial & finance, and your daily productivity skills.

Install
npx -y skills add alirezarezvani/claude-skills --skill rag-architect

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Use when the user asks to design a RAG pipeline, choose a chunking strategy or embedding model, pick a vector database, or evaluate retrieval quality (precision@k, recall@k, NDCG). Examples: 'design a RAG system for our docs', 'what chunk size should I use for this corpus', 'evaluate my retriever against ground truth'. NOT for general LLM cost tuning (use llm-cost-optimizer) or agent loops over retrieval (use agenthub).

SKILL.md

4.4 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

RAG Architect

Design, tune, and evaluate production RAG pipelines with three deterministic tools. Run the tools against the actual corpus and requirements — do not pick chunk sizes or databases by intuition.

Hard rules

  1. Never present model names or vendor prices as current facts. Embedding models and vector-DB pricing rot in months. Recommend a tier (see table below), name a current-generation candidate, and tell the user to verify against the provider's live pricing page.
  2. Every design ends with an evaluation run. A RAG design without retrieval_evaluator.py numbers is a hypothesis, not a deliverable.
  3. Chunking is corpus-driven. Run chunking_optimizer.py on the real documents before choosing a strategy.

Embedding model tiers (pattern, not price list)

TierCurrent-generation examples (verify before use)When
Fast / self-hostedall-MiniLM-L6-v2, bge-smallCost-sensitive, small scale, real-time
Balanced openall-mpnet-base-v2, bge-large, e5-largeQuality without API dependency
Quality APItext-embedding-3-large, voyage-3-largeAccuracy-priority general retrieval
Codevoyage-code-3, CodeBERT-familyCode search corpora

Pricing discipline: build the cost model with a placeholder table — columns model | $/1M tokens (verify) | dims | as-of date — and have the user fill in live numbers. Same for vector DBs (Pinecone/Weaviate/Qdrant/Chroma/pgvector): the selection criteria (managed vs self-hosted, scale, filtering, existing Postgres) are durable; the dollar figures are not.

Workflow

All paths relative to this skill folder. Outputs chain: corpus analysis → design → evaluation.

1. Analyze the corpus and pick chunking

python3 chunking_optimizer.py /path/to/docs --extensions .md .txt -o chunking.json

Emits chunking.json with corpus_info, per-strategy strategy_results, a recommendation, and sample_chunks. Use recommendation.strategy and its config; show the user 2-3 sample_chunks so they can sanity-check boundaries.

2. Design the pipeline from requirements

Write a requirements JSON with these keys (all required): document_types[], document_count, avg_document_size (chars), queries_per_day, query_patterns[], latency_requirement, budget_monthly, accuracy_priority (0-1), cost_priority (0-1), maintenance_complexity.

python3 rag_pipeline_designer.py requirements.json -o design.json

Emits design.json with chunking, embedding, vector_db, retrieval, reranking, evaluation, total_cost, architecture_diagram (mermaid), and config_templates. Present the diagram; label every cost_monthly figure as an estimate to verify (rule 1).

3. Evaluate retrieval quality

Prepare queries.json (list of {id, text} or {"queries": [...]}) and ground_truth.json ({query_id: [relevant_doc_ids]}), then:

python3 retrieval_evaluator.py queries.json /path/to/docs ground_truth.json --k-values 3 5 10 -o eval.json

Reports precision@k, recall@k, MRR, NDCG@k, plus poor_precision_examples / poor_recall_examples for failure analysis.

4. Verification loop

The design is done only when:

  1. eval.json meets targets — typical floors: precision@5 ≥ 0.8, recall@10 ≥ 0.85 (set per use case with the user).
  2. If below target: inspect the poor-example lists, then change one variable (chunking strategy → re-run step 1; embedding tier; add reranking; hybrid retrieval) and re-run step 3. Repeat.
  3. Every recommended model/price in the deliverable carries a "verify current pricing/model availability" note with an as-of date.

References

  • references/chunking_strategies_comparison.md — strategy trade-offs the optimizer implements
  • references/embedding_model_benchmark.md — benchmark methodology (dated snapshot; staleness warning at top)
  • references/rag_evaluation_framework.md — metric definitions (faithfulness, relevance, precision/recall/NDCG)

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.