Generated banner for Dataops
Generated logo for Dataops

Dataops

MicrosoftOfficialPublished by Microsoft

  • Skill
  • Guidelines
  • Software development
  • CC-BY-4.0
  • Low risk
  • Has scripts

From the author

DataOps and DS/MLOps testing reference for data tiering, Bronze-to-Silver validation placement, pipeline invariants, pytest categories, and validation-versus-drift. Use when designing, reviewing, or generating data pipelines, transformation code, data validation, or data-science test suites.
— the description by Microsoft

AutoGineer summary

Written by AutoGineer from the skill’s own files, not by the author

The dataops skill provides a structured reference for designing and reviewing data pipelines and machine learning workflows. It synthesizes engineering best practices regarding data quality tiers (Bronze, Silver, Gold), the strategic placement of validation logic, and the importance of maintaining faithful source copies for pipeline replayability. The skill helps teams distinguish between data validation and drift detection, ensuring that data-heavy systems are robust, testable, and maintainable.

What it does

  • Defines data tier semantics for Bronze, Silver, and Gold storage layers.
  • Provides rules for placing validation at the Bronze-to-Silver boundary.
  • Explains the rationale for maintaining immutable, faithful source copies in the Bronze tier.
  • Offers guidance on distinguishing between data validation and drift detection.
  • Provides a framework for testing data science and MLOps code.
  • Includes a contract for synthetic data operations to ensure safe preflight validation.

When to use it

  • When designing the architecture of a new data pipeline or lakehouse.
  • When reviewing data transformation code or pipeline test suites.
  • When deciding where to implement data validation checks.
  • When troubleshooting pipeline failures that require data replay or recovery.
  • When establishing testing strategies for machine learning models and data loading processes.

Advantages

  • Ensures consistent application of data quality and pipeline invariants.
  • Promotes robust recovery strategies through faithful data ingestion.
  • Clarifies the distinction between validation and drift for better observability.
  • Provides clear, attributed guidance based on established engineering playbooks.
  • Prevents common pitfalls like premature validation before data landing.

Usage examples

“Where should I place validation logic in my ETL pipeline?”
The skill advises placing validation at the Bronze-to-Silver boundary, explaining that Bronze should remain a faithful, immutable copy of the source to support replayability and recovery.
“What is the difference between data validation and drift detection?”
The skill provides a breakdown distinguishing data validation (schema and invariant checks) from drift detection (monitoring changes in data or model signals over time).

Install

  1. Download the skill as a ZIP:

    https://mp-staging.autogineer.com/agent-skills/microsoft/dataops/download
  2. Unzip it into the cross-client skills folder of your project:

    mkdir -p .agents/skills && unzip dataops.zip -d .agents/skills

Documentation by Microsoft

DataOps Reference Pack

Goal

Ground pipeline and test generation in the Microsoft CSE engineering playbook so that data tier semantics, validation placement, recovery invariants, and DS/MLOps test technique are applied consistently and attributed accurately.

Inputs

  • The pipeline, transformation, validation, or test work under discussion

  • The tier of each dataset involved, when the consuming workflow records one

  • Existing test layout, package structure, and data-access boundaries

  • A data classification produced elsewhere, when sensitivity matters

Reference index

Read only the reference that matches the active concern.

ReferenceRead this when
data-tiers-and-pipeline-invariants.mdAssigning tier meaning, placing validation, routing malformed records, or asserting replay, idempotency, testability, source-control, and configuration invariants
testing-data-science-and-mlops.mdWriting or reviewing tests for data loading, transformation, model load or predict, data validation, or model robustness
validation-drift-and-observability.mdDistinguishing data validation from drift detection, choosing remediation, or deciding which data and model signals matter
synthetic-data-operation-contract.mdValidating synthetic-data preflight authority, field lineage, conditional subgroup evidence, result linkage, or guarded local replacement
provenance.mdConfirming what is upstream guidance, what is HVE Core derivation, and where upstream is silent

Success criteria

  • Tier language distinguishes the three upstream quality tiers from the additional storage areas.

  • Validation is placed at the Bronze-to-Silver boundary, and the faithful-copy rationale with both replay purposes travels with that placement whether or not the request challenges it.

  • Test guidance names the operation category, its technique, and where mocking stops.

  • Validation and drift keep their distinct definitions and their distinct remediation paths.

  • Every claim traces to an attributed upstream source or is labelled as HVE Core guidance.

  • Synthetic-data generation stops before source access or writes unless its applicable SYNTHETIC_DATA_OPERATION_V1 preflight passes deterministic validation.

Constraints

  • This skill generates code, assertions, and review guidance. It does not execute pipelines, transformation engines, or telemetry backends.

  • Reproduce only the minimum text necessary for a specific technical point, and paraphrase everything else. Attribute every reference and describe accurately what each reference reproduces.

  • Label HVE Core derivations as such. Do not present a derived consequence or a repository convention as upstream guidance.

  • Where upstream is silent, say so rather than inventing an upstream-sounding rule.

Ownership boundaries

This skill decides which data and model signals matter. It does not own the vocabulary, the classification, or the surrounding workflow.

ConcernOwner
Metric names, instrument types, units, cardinality discipline, and the PII emission denylisttelemetry-foundations
Data sensitivity classification and DPIA thresholdsprivacy-standards
Entity semantics, relationships, and which tier a dataset is recorded asThe calling workflow
Feasibility assessment and go/no-go recommendationThe calling workflow

No repository artifact currently owns the last two rows. When the caller supplies neither, state the gap rather than deciding tier assignment or feasibility here.

This skill never decides what is sensitive. It reads a classification produced elsewhere.

For synthetic-data operations, read synthetic-data-operation-contract.md and validate records against synthetic-data-operation-v1.schema.json. The contract records qualified decisions by immutable reference; it does not store source values or replace the authority of data, privacy, Responsible AI, fairness, or domain owners.

Stop rules

  • Stop and route metric naming, units, and cardinality to telemetry-foundations, the OpenTelemetry-aligned vocabulary and instrumentation skill. Route data sensitivity to privacy-standards, the privacy classification and DPIA-threshold reference.

  • Stop and state the gap when the request depends on guidance the playbook does not provide, such as a drift threshold or an alerting policy.

  • Stop and offer the correct placement when asked to validate before Bronze landing, rather than complying or refusing without an alternative.

Attribution

This pack declares CC-BY-4.0 because both bodies of content it holds carry that license.

Source pages are Microsoft CSE Code With Engineering Playbook documentation licensed CC BY 4.0. The upstream project applies MIT through a separate LICENSE-CODE file to code samples only, which this pack does not reproduce. The references derive from those documentation pages and have been changed: upstream guidance is paraphrased, and only identifiers and structural names are carried across as facts. THIRD-PARTY-NOTICES carries the attribution CC BY 4.0 requires and states that the content has been changed. Each reference cites its own upstream URL and states what it reproduces.

Content labelled as HVE Core derivation is repository-original material under CC BY 4.0. See provenance.md for the consolidated source map and derivation labels.

Files

references/validation-drift-and-observability.md


title: Validation, drift, and observability boundaries description: The data-validation versus data-drift distinction with its correct source, the asymmetric remediation each triggers, and the ownership seam for telemetry and classification

Sources

Content below is derived from the upstream pages and has been changed. Term names are preserved as identifiers; the validation-versus-drift definitions, the remediation pair, and the practice list are paraphrased. THIRD-PARTY-NOTICES carries the attribution CC BY 4.0 requires. The validation-versus-drift distinction comes from the ML Model Production Checklist, not from the DataOps Fundamentals page or the testing page; cite the checklist for it.

Validation and drift are different mechanisms

Data validation catches data that is simply wrong. Upstream illustrates it with a value sitting outside the range it should occupy.

Data drift detection surfaces genuine movement in the data. These shifts faithfully reflect the phenomenon under study rather than being mistakes in it. Upstream illustrates it with users' preferences changing over time.

Both are worth monitoring. They are not the same signal and they do not share a response.

Before classifying an observed shift as drift, rule out an upstream ingestion or schema defect. A shift caused by a defect is a validation issue wearing drift's clothing, and routing it to retraining trains the model on corrupt data.

The remediation is asymmetric

SignalWhat it meansWhat it triggers
Validation issueThe values themselves are wrongReroute and repair the data
DriftThe world changed and the data reflects itAdapt the model, or retrain it

This asymmetry is the practical point of the distinction. Collapsing both into "trigger investigation" loses it.

Data-validation practices

Upstream names three data-validation best practices:

  • Run automated data-quality tests at every stage of the pipeline.

  • Send records that fail those tests to a separate store where they can be diagnosed and put right.

  • Observe the data end to end across freshness, distribution, volume, schema, and lineage.

"Each stage" means each transformation boundary from Bronze onward. It does not authorize assertions at Bronze landing, which stays a faithful copy of the source so that replay remains possible. See data-tiers-and-pipeline-invariants.md for that rationale.

The re-routing practice is the same behavior the DataOps guidance describes as sending failed records to a malformed-data store.

Drift monitoring

Understanding whether production data differs significantly from training-phase data matters, as does confirming that distribution information can be obtained for incoming data. Drift monitoring can indicate when changes occur and what their character is, such as abrupt versus gradual, and can guide an effective adaptation or retraining strategy.

Upstream questions worth asking include which kinds of drift have been experienced or are expected, whether a drift-detection strategy exists and matches those expectations, whether anomalies in input data raise warnings, and whether an adaptation strategy exists.

What ML observability does and does not supply

The Observability in Machine Learning page frames observability across experimentation and production. It names model experimentation and tuning, production, training and retraining, performance over time and data drift, and data versioning. Observable targets include code, model, and data changes, evaluation metrics, parameters, dataset versions, source and notebook snapshots, run output and logs, and production service observability.

That page is silent on:

  • Data validation entirely, including checks, failure conditions, and remediation

  • The validation-versus-drift comparison

  • Drift thresholds, alerting, ownership, and automatic remediation

  • Distinct data-quality or feature-distribution monitoring as separate concerns

  • Metric naming, instrument types, units, and schemas

Use it for lifecycle framing and drift awareness. Do not ground validation rules or quantitative controls in it.

Which signals matter

This skill selects the signals worth observing for data and model work. Upstream supports monitoring infrastructure, pipelines, and data, and specifically names the malformed record store as an area needing data monitoring.

Signal categories worth selecting:

  • Records failing the Bronze-to-Silver validation boundary

  • Validation stage cost

  • Pipeline replay frequency, as evidence that idempotency is exercised

  • Model serving latency

  • Feature or input distribution shift

Ownership seam

Selecting a signal is not the same as naming it. Respect these boundaries.

ConcernOwnerThis skill's relationship
Metric naming pattern, instrument types, units, cardinality disciplinetelemetry-foundationsConform. Do not invent names, instruments, or units here.
PII in emitted telemetrytelemetry-foundations denylistObey. A denylisted field cannot become a dimension.
Data sensitivity classification and DPIA thresholdsprivacy-standardsRead the classification. Never decide what is sensitive.
Which data and model signals matterThis skillOwn.

Drift monitoring invites high-cardinality dimensions such as per-column, per-feature, per-source, and per-record. Cardinality discipline belongs to telemetry-foundations, the OpenTelemetry-aligned metric, trace, log, unit, and PII-safe instrumentation skill; apply its rules rather than restating them here.

Upstream silence on thresholds

No page in this source set prescribes a drift threshold, an alerting policy, an ownership model, or an automatic remediation trigger. Thresholds are engagement-specific. State that plainly rather than supplying a number that would read as playbook-backed.

Requirements and compatibility

Written for: GitHub Copilot, Claude Code

Works with: Claude Code, Claude apps, OpenAI Codex, GitHub Copilot, Cursor, Gemini CLI, Kiro, OpenCode, Goose, Amp, Roo Code, JetBrains Junie, Factory Droid, Devin (ex-Windsurf), Mistral Vibe, OpenHands, Letta

“Works with” means the tool reads the open Agent Skills format; a skill written for one tool may use features others lack.

Needs: Claude Code frontmatter, Needs Python

Security

What our scanner noticed· Low risk

  • Scripts that your agent may run

This skill includes scripts that your agent may run. Read them before you use it.

A static scan is not a guarantee. Skills are third-party content: review a skill before you let an agent use it.

Attribution and licence

Published by
Microsoft
Publisher
Microsoft (Official)
Source
microsoft/hve-core · .github/skills/data-science-engineering/dataops · commit f425e94
Licence
Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International (redistribution allowed)
  • LICENSE (written by AutoGineer)
  • ATTRIBUTION.md (written by AutoGineer)
Synced

AutoGineer is not affiliated with or endorsed by Microsoft.

Download ZIP

The ZIP holds the skill’s files, its licence files and an ATTRIBUTION.md. Download dataops.zip