[prompt-clustering] Copilot Agent Prompt Clustering Analysis - 990 Tasks Analyzed #14588
Replies: 1 comment
-
|
🤖 Beep boop! The smoke test agent was here! 🎪 Just did a quick flyby to make sure all the gears are turning smoothly. Everything looks ship-shape! ⚓️✨ May your clusters be well-separated and your silhouette scores be ever in your favor! 📊🎯
|
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
0 replies
Sign up for free
to join this conversation on GitHub.
Already have an account?
Sign in to comment
Uh oh!
There was an error while loading. Please reload this page.
-
Daily NLP-based clustering analysis of copilot agent task prompts using machine learning to identify patterns, success rates, and optimization opportunities.
Summary
Analysis Date: 2026-02-09
Analysis Period: Last 30 days
Total Tasks Analyzed: 990
Clusters Identified: 8
Overall Success Rate: 69.2%
Clustering Quality: 0.086 (silhouette score)
Key Findings
View Detailed Cluster Analysis
Cluster 1: Dependency Updates (356 tasks, 36.0%)
Characteristics: Largest cluster focusing on dependency updates, package version bumps, and maintaining up-to-date dependencies. High success rate indicates well-structured, predictable tasks.
Sample Task:
Cluster 2: CI/CD & Workflows (199 tasks, 20.1%)
Characteristics: Second-largest cluster dealing with GitHub Actions workflows, CI/CD pipelines, and workflow automation. Lowest success rate suggests these tasks are more complex or require more careful handling.
Sample Task:
Cluster 3: General Maintenance - MCP Servers (100 tasks, 10.1%)
Characteristics: Focus on MCP server configurations, updates, and maintenance. Highest file change count indicates significant scope. Higher comment count suggests more iteration needed.
Sample Task:
Cluster 4: General Maintenance - Safe Outputs (89 tasks, 9.0%)
Characteristics: Tasks related to safe-outputs functionality, project configuration, and output handling. Strong success rate indicates well-defined scope.
Cluster 5: Bug Fixes - Workflow Failures (74 tasks, 7.5%)
Characteristics: Bug fixes with workflow references and log analysis. Lower comment count suggests clearer problem definition.
Cluster 6: General Maintenance - Task Mining (70 tasks, 7.1%)
Characteristics: Focus on task mining and discussion management. Lower success rate may indicate complexity in automated task generation.
Cluster 7: Bug Fixes - Campaigns & Security (63 tasks, 6.4%)
Characteristics: Smallest scope tasks focusing on campaigns, security, and documentation fixes.
Cluster 8: Bug Fixes - Workflow Jobs (39 tasks, 3.9%)
Characteristics: Highest success rate despite complexity. Tasks with clear failure references (job IDs, URLs) lead to better outcomes.
Sample Task:
Success Rate Comparison
Cluster Distribution
Insights & Patterns
✅ What Works Well
🔍 Key Observations
Recommendations
1. Improve CI/CD Task Prompts
Issue: CI/CD & Workflows cluster has lowest success rate (58.8%)
Action:
2. Leverage Successful Bug Fix Patterns
Observation: Bug fixes with job IDs achieve 79.5% success
Action:
3. Manage Task Complexity
Issue: MCP server tasks average 42 files changed with 4.5 comments
Action:
4. Enhance Task Mining Success
Issue: Task mining cluster has 58.6% success rate
Action:
5. Continue Monitoring Trends
Action:
Methodology
Data Source: 990 copilot-created PRs from last 30 days
Analysis Approach:
Limitations:
Next Steps
Full Report: Available in workflow artifacts
Cluster Assignments:
/tmp/gh-aw/pr-data/cluster-assignments.jsonAnalysis Script:
/tmp/gh-aw/clustering-analysis.pyBeta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
All reactions