Source profileQuality 91/100

notque/vexjoy-agent/skills/engineering/enterprise-search/SKILL.md

enterprise-search

Enterprise search: relevance tuning, query understanding, index management, search quality, ranking optimization, schema design.

Source repository stars
413
Declared platforms
0
Static risk flags
1
Last source update
2026-07-25
Source checked
2026-08-04

Decision brief

What it does—and where it fits

Search infrastructure design, relevance tuning, query understanding, index management, quality measurement, and performance optimization. Each mode loads its own reference files on demand.

Best for

    Not for

    • Tasks that require unconfirmed production actions or broad system permissions.
    • Environments where the pinned source and install steps cannot be inspected.

    Compatibility matrix

    Platform support, with evidence labels

    PlatformStatusEvidenceWhat to check
    CodexNot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
    Claude CodeNot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
    CursorNot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
    Gemini CLINot declaredNo explicit evidencePortability before use
    Open the compatibility checker

    Installation

    Inspect first. Install second.

    The source command is displayed only when detected. A safe inspection prompt is always available so your agent can explain every action before execution.

    Source-detected install commandSource
    npx skills add https://github.com/notque/vexjoy-agent --skill "skills/engineering/enterprise-search"
    Safe inspection promptEditorial

    Inspect the Agent Skill "enterprise-search" from https://github.com/notque/vexjoy-agent/blob/b19dacd072f5befd29b525b25dbecc7a1cd86d92/skills/engineering/enterprise-search/SKILL.md at commit b19dacd072f5befd29b525b25dbecc7a1cd86d92. List every install step, command, network request, credential, file read/write, external action, and rollback step. Explain whether it fits my task. Do not install or execute anything until I approve.

    Workflow

    What the source asks the agent to do

    1. 01

      Workflow by Mode

      Load: references/relevance-tuning.md, references/llm-search-failure-modes.md

      Diagnose — Identify the relevance problem before tuning.Baseline — Capture current relevance metrics before making changes. Minimum: nDCG@10, P@5, MRR on a representative judgment set. No tuning without a baseline.Tune — Apply changes from the reference. One variable at a time. Measure after each change.
    2. 02

      Mode Detection

      Classify into one mode before proceeding.

      Classify into one mode before proceeding.If the request spans modes, pick the primary and note the secondary. ARCHITECTURE mode loads references from whichever sub-topics apply.
    3. 03

      RELEVANCE Mode

      Load: references/relevance-tuning.md, references/llm-search-failure-modes.md

      Diagnose — Identify the relevance problem before tuning.Baseline — Capture current relevance metrics before making changes. Minimum: nDCG@10, P@5, MRR on a representative judgment set. No tuning without a baseline.Tune — Apply changes from the reference. One variable at a time. Measure after each change.
    4. 04

      QUERY Mode

      Load: references/query-understanding.md, references/llm-search-failure-modes.md

      Classify query intent — Determine what the user wants before constructing the query.Extract entities — People, products, dates, categories, attributes from the query string.Transform — Apply query expansion, spelling correction, synonym injection, and relaxation strategies from the reference.
    5. 05

      INDEX Mode

      Load: references/index-management.md, references/llm-search-failure-modes.md

      Requirements — Gather before designing.Design schema — Map fields with appropriate types. Use the reference for type selection guidance.Configure analyzers — Build analyzer chains for each text field. Standard analyzer is a starting point, not a solution.

    Permission review

    Static risk signals and limitations

    Network access

    medium · line 219

    The documentation includes network, browsing, or remote request actions.

    | Solr 9.x | SolrQL / JSON Request API | solrconfig.xml + schema.xml | Config-driven, ZooKeeper coordination |

    Evidence record

    Why each signal appears

    EvidenceSourceComputedTestedEditorial
    SignalValueEvidence typeMeaning
    Quality score91/100ComputedDocumentation, specificity, maintenance, and trust rules
    Repository stars413SourceRepository attention, not individual Skill quality
    Compatibility0 platformsSourceDeclared in the catalog source record
    Usage guideautomated source guideEditorialGenerated or reviewed according to the visible evidence level

    Pinned source

    Provenance and original SKILL.md

    Repository
    notque/vexjoy-agent
    Skill path
    skills/engineering/enterprise-search/SKILL.md
    Commit
    b19dacd072f5befd29b525b25dbecc7a1cd86d92
    License
    MIT
    Collected
    2026-08-04
    Default branch
    main
    View the original SKILL.md

    Enterprise Search Engineering

    Search infrastructure design, relevance tuning, query understanding, index management, quality measurement, and performance optimization. Each mode loads its own reference files on demand.


    Mode Detection

    Classify into one mode before proceeding.

    ModeSignal PhrasesReference
    RELEVANCEtune relevance, BM25, boost, function score, field weight, LTR, learned ranking, ranking modelreferences/relevance-tuning.md
    QUERYquery understanding, intent classification, entity extraction, query expansion, synonyms, spell correction, query rewritingreferences/query-understanding.md
    INDEXschema design, mapping, analyzer chain, reindex, alias, ILM, index template, field typereferences/index-management.md
    QUALITYnDCG, MRR, precision, recall, search quality, judgment, A/B test, evaluation, search funnelreferences/search-quality.md
    PERFORMANCEslow query, shard, cache, circuit breaker, scroll, search_after, query optimization, latencyreferences/performance-optimization.md
    ARCHITECTUREsearch architecture, hybrid search, vector search, pipeline design, platform selection, migration(cross-reference: load relevant references based on sub-topic)

    If the request spans modes, pick the primary and note the secondary. ARCHITECTURE mode loads references from whichever sub-topics apply.


    Workflow by Mode

    RELEVANCE Mode

    Load: references/relevance-tuning.md, references/llm-search-failure-modes.md

    1. Diagnose — Identify the relevance problem before tuning.
    Problem ClassSymptomsStarting Point
    Poor precisionGood results buried under noiseField boosting, minimum_should_match
    Poor recallKnown-good results missingAnalyzer tuning, query expansion, synonym filters
    Wrong orderingRight results, wrong rankBM25 parameter tuning, function scoring
    Domain mismatchGeneric scoring fails domainLearned ranking (LTR), custom similarity
    FreshnessStale results ranked too highDecay functions, recency boosts
    1. Baseline — Capture current relevance metrics before making changes. Minimum: nDCG@10, P@5, MRR on a representative judgment set. No tuning without a baseline.

    2. Tune — Apply changes from the reference. One variable at a time. Measure after each change.

    Tuning LayerToolsWhen to Use
    Analyzer chainTokenizers, filters, char_filtersRecall problems, morphological mismatch
    Field boostingMulti-match boosts, cross_fieldsSome fields matter more than others
    BM25 parametersk1, b per fieldContent-type-specific term saturation
    Function scoringDecay, field_value_factor, script_scoreNon-textual relevance signals (popularity, freshness, authority)
    Rescoringrescore query with window_sizeExpensive scoring on top-N candidates
    Learned ranking (LTR)Feature engineering, model training, SLTR pluginBM25 + hand-tuned boosts plateau
    1. Validate — Compare against baseline. Accept only statistically significant improvements. Check for regression on other query classes.

    Gate: Baseline metrics captured. Each tuning change measured independently. No "tuned several things and it got better" — isolate the effect.

    QUERY Mode

    Load: references/query-understanding.md, references/llm-search-failure-modes.md

    1. Classify query intent — Determine what the user wants before constructing the query.
    IntentExampleQuery Strategy
    Navigational"OpenSearch documentation"Exact match, title boost, URL matching
    Informational"how to configure sharding"Full-text across body fields, snippet extraction
    Transactional"buy enterprise license"Product/SKU fields, availability filters
    Faceted"red shoes size 10"Structured filters + text scoring
    Exploratory"machine learning applications"Broad match, diversified results, related terms
    1. Extract entities — People, products, dates, categories, attributes from the query string.

    2. Transform — Apply query expansion, spelling correction, synonym injection, and relaxation strategies from the reference.

    3. Construct — Build the platform-specific query DSL. Include:

      • bool query structure (must/should/filter/must_not)
      • Field selection and boosting
      • Filters vs scoring clauses (filters for hard constraints, scoring for ranking signals)
      • Aggregations for facets
    4. Test — Validate against known queries. Check that transformations improve recall without destroying precision.

    Gate: Query pipeline handles the 5 intent types. Entity extraction covers the domain vocabulary. Expansion and relaxation strategies are measurable.

    INDEX Mode

    Load: references/index-management.md, references/llm-search-failure-modes.md

    1. Requirements — Gather before designing.
    QuestionWhy It Matters
    Document count and growth rateShard count, ILM policy
    Average document sizeShard sizing, bulk indexing batch size
    Query patternsWhich fields need text analysis vs keyword vs numeric
    Update frequencyNear-real-time vs batch, refresh interval
    Retention policyILM phases, rollover triggers
    Access patternsHot/warm/cold architecture, read vs write ratio
    1. Design schema — Map fields with appropriate types. Use the reference for type selection guidance.

    2. Configure analyzers — Build analyzer chains for each text field. Standard analyzer is a starting point, not a solution.

    3. Template and alias — Set up index templates for consistent creation. Use aliases for zero-downtime operations.

    4. Reindex strategy — Plan for schema evolution. Reindexing is inevitable; design for it.

    Gate: Schema covers all query-time field requirements. Analyzer chains tested against representative content. Alias strategy supports zero-downtime reindexing.

    QUALITY Mode

    Load: references/search-quality.md, references/llm-search-failure-modes.md

    1. Define metrics — Select metrics appropriate to the use case.
    MetricMeasuresBest For
    nDCG@kGraded relevance at rank kRankings with multiple relevance levels
    MRRPosition of first relevant resultNavigational queries, single-answer
    P@kFraction relevant in top kPrecision-critical applications
    Recall@kFraction of relevant docs found in top kRecall-critical applications (legal, compliance)
    MAPAverage precision across recall levelsBalanced precision/recall
    1. Collect judgments — Build the ground truth dataset.
    MethodScaleQualityCost
    Expert annotationSmall (100s)HighestHigh
    Click logsLarge (10K+)Moderate (position bias)Low
    CrowdsourcingMedium (1K+)VariableMedium
    LLM-assistedMedium-LargeGood for initial pass, needs validationLow
    1. Evaluate — Run offline evaluation. Compare configurations. Report metrics with confidence intervals.

    2. Online testing — A/B test or interleave changes against production. Measure engagement metrics alongside relevance metrics.

    3. Monitor — Continuous quality dashboards. Alerting on metric degradation. Search funnel analysis (query -> click -> conversion).

    Gate: Judgment set exists with documented guidelines. Offline metrics computed with confidence intervals. Online test plan specifies primary metric, minimum detectable effect, and sample size.

    PERFORMANCE Mode

    Load: references/performance-optimization.md, references/llm-search-failure-modes.md

    1. Profile — Identify the bottleneck before optimizing.
    SymptomLikely CauseDiagnostic
    High p99 latencySlow queries, GC pauses, shard imbalanceSlow query log, node stats, hot threads
    Throughput ceilingUndersized thread pools, too many shardsThread pool stats, shard count per node
    Memory pressureField data, too many aggregations, deep paginationNode stats, circuit breaker trips
    Indexing lagMerge throttling, refresh overhead, slow pipelinesIndex stats, merge stats
    Cluster instabilitySplit brain, disk watermarks, master stormsCluster health, allocation explain
    1. Diagnose — Use platform diagnostics to confirm the cause. Measure before changing.

    2. Optimize — Apply targeted fixes from the reference. One change at a time, measure the effect.

    3. Validate — Load test the change. Check that optimization does not degrade other metrics (latency vs throughput tradeoff, cache hit rate vs memory).

    Gate: Bottleneck identified with evidence. Fix targeted at root cause. Load test confirms improvement without regression.

    ARCHITECTURE Mode

    Cross-cutting mode. Load references based on the specific question.

    1. Platform evaluation — When selecting or migrating between platforms.
    PlatformStrengthsConsider When
    Elasticsearch/OpenSearchMature ecosystem, Lucene-based, strong text searchGeneral-purpose search, log analytics
    VespaBuilt-in ML serving, tensor computation, real-time updatesML-heavy ranking, large-scale recommendations
    TypesenseSimple API, typo tolerance, easy setupDeveloper-facing search, smaller datasets
    SolrConfigurable, NRT, strong facetingLegacy integration, specific Solr features
    MeilisearchInstant search, typo-tolerant, developer-friendlyFrontend search, prototyping
    Custom (Lucene/Tantivy)Full control, embeddedSpecialized needs, tight integration
    1. Hybrid search design — When combining keyword and vector retrieval.
    StrategyHowTradeoff
    Score fusion (RRF)Reciprocal rank fusion of BM25 + vector resultsSimple, no training needed. Weights are heuristic.
    Linear combinationWeighted sum of normalized BM25 + vector scoresTunable. Requires score normalization.
    Re-rankingBM25 retrieval -> vector re-rank top NEfficient. Vector search only on candidates.
    Two-stageCoarse retrieval (either) -> fine-grained re-rank (LTR)Best quality. Most complex.
    1. Pipeline design — Ingestion, enrichment, indexing, query, ranking pipelines.

    2. Migration planning — Version upgrades, platform changes, zero-downtime strategies.


    LLM Failure Modes in Search Engineering

    Load references/llm-search-failure-modes.md for all modes. These are the specific ways LLMs fail at search tasks:

    Failure ModeWhat HappensDefense
    Hallucinated query DSLLLM invents plausible-looking query syntax that does not existValidate every query against the specific platform version's API docs
    Version confusionMixing Elasticsearch 7.x and 8.x APIs, or ES and OpenSearch syntaxState the exact platform and version upfront. Reference version-specific docs.
    Generic relevance advice"Improve your relevance by boosting important fields" without specificsRequire concrete field names, boost values, and expected metric impact
    Vector search as defaultRecommending embeddings when BM25 with good analyzers solves the problemStart with BM25 tuning. Vector search adds complexity; justify the added value.
    Ignoring measurementSuggesting changes without a quality measurement frameworkRequire baseline metrics before any tuning recommendation
    Deprecated feature suggestionsRecommending removed or deprecated APIs (type mappings, indices.optimize)Check the deprecation/migration guide for the target version
    Over-engineered schemasAdding 50 fields with sub-fields when 10 fields cover the queriesSchema complexity should match query requirements, not data model completeness
    Cargo-cult configurationCopying cluster settings from blog posts without understanding the workloadEvery configuration value should have a justification tied to the specific workload

    Platform-Specific Conventions

    When generating configuration or queries, always specify the target platform and version.

    PlatformQuery LanguageConfig FormatKey Differences
    Elasticsearch 8.xQuery DSL (JSON)elasticsearch.ymlSecurity on by default, no type mappings
    OpenSearch 2.xQuery DSL (JSON)opensearch.ymlFork divergence from ES 7.10, alerting built-in
    Solr 9.xSolrQL / JSON Request APIsolrconfig.xml + schema.xmlConfig-driven, ZooKeeper coordination
    VespaYQLservices.xml + schemasCustom ranking expressions, tensors native
    TypesenseREST paramsCommand-line / JSONSimpler model, automatic typo tolerance

    Cross-platform traps:

    • OpenSearch _search API is largely ES 7.10-compatible, but diverges on security, ML, and alerting APIs
    • Elasticsearch _field_caps behavior changed between 7.x and 8.x
    • Solr edismax and ES multi_match are similar in concept but differ in syntax, defaults, and tie-breaking
    • Vespa ranking expressions are not Lucene scoring — different mental model entirely

    Output Conventions

    • Markdown with clear headers. Scannable by engineers.
    • All query DSL in fenced code blocks with platform and version annotation: ````json // OpenSearch 2.x```
    • Tables for parameter comparisons, metric results, configuration options.
    • Every recommendation includes: what to change, why, expected effect, how to measure.
    • Configuration snippets are copy-pasteable with comments explaining each value.

    Reference Loading Table

    ReferenceContentsLoad When
    references/relevance-tuning.mdBM25 parameters, LTR features, boost strategies, function scoring, field weightingRELEVANCE mode, or relevance sub-questions in other modes
    references/query-understanding.mdIntent classification, entity extraction, query expansion, spell correction, query relaxationQUERY mode, or query pipeline questions
    references/index-management.mdSchema design, analyzer chains, mapping optimization, reindex strategies, ILMINDEX mode, or schema/mapping questions
    references/search-quality.mdnDCG, MRR, P@k, judgment collection, A/B testing, evaluation methodologyQUALITY mode, or measurement questions
    references/performance-optimization.mdQuery optimization, caching, sharding, pagination, circuit breakers, slow query diagnosisAll modes — always load as guardrail
    references/llm-search-failure-modes.mdHow LLMs fail at search tasks: hallucinated DSL, version confusion, generic advice, measurement avoidanceAll modes — always load as guardrail

    Alternatives

    Compare before choosing

    Computed 9929,558

    HKUDS/Vibe-Trading

    strategy-generate

    Create, modify, and optimize quantitative trading strategies, then backtest and evaluate them.

    Computed 97106

    AI-Unified-Process/marketplace

    browserless-test

    Creates Vaadin Browserless server-side unit tests for Vaadin views covering navigation, component interactions, form validation, grid operations, and notifications. Use when the user asks to "write Browserless tests", "write Vaadin UI unit tests", "unit test a Vaadin view without a browser", "create view tests with the official Vaadin testing framework", or mentions Browserless testing, SpringBrowserlessTest, browserless-test-junit6, UI Unit Testing, or server-side Vaadin testing.

    Computed 9723

    freenet/freenet-agent-skills

    dapp-builder

    Build and maintain decentralized applications on Freenet using river as a template. Guides through designing contracts (shared state), delegates (private state), and UI, and through upgrading a live dApp safely. Use when user wants to create a new Freenet dApp, design contract state, implement delegates, build a Freenet-connected UI, OR upgrade an existing dApp — bump freenet-stdlib, ship a new contract/delegate version (v2), fix a bug that re-keys the WASM, or migrate state across a contract/de

    Computed 976

    mgiovani/cc-arsenal

    team-review

    Multi-agent review team: architecture, security, performance, testing, style, docs/UX, plus an adversary that cross-examines the other 6, for security-sensitive, architectural, or large PRs (15+ files) where a single-agent pass risks missing cross-cutting issues. Use for auth/payments/PII changes, schema/pattern changes, compliance sign-off, or when asked to 'get the review team on this' / 'multi-agent review' / 'thorough review before merge'. For a standard PR or a quick pre-merge check, use /r