# Training Check

> Monitor WandB training health.

- Skill: `kyrie66nb/training-check` (Agent Skill)
- Install (CLI): `npx skillmds@latest add kyrie66nb/training-check`
- Raw SKILL.md: https://api.skillmd.com/api/skills/kyrie66nb/training-check/raw
- Safety review: pending
- Works with: Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex
- Category: Coding & Dev Tools
- Author: kyrie66nb (https://skillmd.com/u/kyrie66nb)
- Updated: 2026-09-17
- Page: https://skillmd.com/skills/kyrie66nb/training-check

---


# Training Check

Periodically read WandB metrics during training to catch problems early. Do not wait until training finishes to discover it was a waste of GPU time.

## Context: $ARGUMENTS

## Constants

- **WANDB_RUN** - Read from project notes or pass as `entity/project/run_id`.
- **CHECK_INTERVAL** - Starts at 10 minutes, then gradually increases if consistently healthy: 10 min -> 20 min -> 30 min -> 60 min (cap).
- **REVIEWER_MODEL = `gpt-5.4`** - Used via a secondary Codex agent for ambiguous cases only.

## When to Use

- After training is confirmed running (session alive, loss decreasing for the first few steps)
- When the user wants recurring health checks during training
- **This skill checks training QUALITY, not process HEALTH.** Process health (session alive, GPU utilization) belongs to watchdog-style monitoring.

## Workflow

### Step 1: Read WandB Metrics

```python
import wandb
api = wandb.Api()
run = api.run("<entity>/<project>/<run_id>")
history = run.history()
```

If WandB is unreachable (API error, network issue), fall back to reading the log file directly via SSH:

```bash
ssh server "tail -100 /path/to/training.log"
```

Check these signals:

- **Loss trend** - Is training loss decreasing over the last N steps?
- **Eval metrics** - Are evaluation metrics improving (or at least not degrading)?
- **NaN / Inf** - Any NaN or Inf values in loss or gradients?
- **Spikes** - Sudden large jumps in loss (>10x normal variance)?
- **Learning rate** - Is the schedule behaving as expected?
- **Gradient norm** - Exploding or vanishing?

### Step 2: Judgment

| Signal | Judgment | Action |
|--------|----------|--------|
| NaN/Inf in loss | **Clearly bad** | Stop training, investigate |
| Loss diverging (increasing for >N steps) | **Clearly bad** | Stop training, investigate |
| Eval metrics significantly worse than baseline | **Clearly bad** | Stop training, investigate |
| Loss decreasing, metrics improving | **Clearly fine** | Continue, increase check interval |
| Loss flat but not diverging | **Unsure** | -> Step 3 (secondary review) |
| Metrics noisy, can't tell trend | **Unsure** | -> Step 3 (secondary review) |
| Slightly worse than baseline but still early | **Unsure** | -> Step 3 (secondary review) |

### Step 3: Secondary Codex Judgment (only when unsure)

Only escalate when the signal is ambiguous. For clearly good or clearly bad signals, act directly.

```text
spawn_agent:
  model: REVIEWER_MODEL
  reasoning_effort: high
  message: |
    TRAINING HEALTH CHECK - need your judgment on ambiguous metrics.

    Run: <entity>/<project>/<run_id>
    Current epoch/step: X / Y total
    Training loss (last 10 checkpoints): [values]
    Eval metrics (last 3 evals): [values]
    Baseline reference: [numbers from paper/reproduction]

    What I'm unsure about: [specific concern]

    Please respond with exactly one of:
    - STOP: clearly problematic, should kill training
    - CONTINUE: looks fine, check again next interval
    - WAIT: not enough data to judge, check again sooner
```

If delegation is unavailable, make a local judgment using the same rubric and mark the decision `[pending external review]`. In ambiguous cases with no hard failure, prefer `WAIT` over `STOP`.

### Step 4: Act

| Decision | Action |
|----------|--------|
| **Stop** | Kill the training session. Save the WandB run URL, key metrics, and reason for stopping. Log to project notes for debugging. |
| **Continue** | Do nothing. Re-run at the next interval (increase interval if consistently healthy). |
| **Wait** | Do nothing but keep the current short interval (do not increase). |

## Integration with Watchdog

`training-check` and watchdog-style monitoring operate at different levels:

| Layer | Tool | What it checks | Frequency |
|-------|------|----------------|-----------|
| Process health | watchdog | Session alive? GPU active? | Every 60s (continuous) |
| Training quality | training-check | Loss trend? Metrics improving? | Every 10-60 min (periodic) |

Use both together:

- Watchdog catches crashes and idle GPUs immediately
- `training-check` catches subtle quality issues (loss plateau, metric degradation)

## Rules

- Do not stop training on the first sign of noise - some loss spikes are normal. Look at **trends over multiple checkpoints**.
- When stopping training, always save the WandB run URL and key metrics as evidence.
- If both WandB and log files are unreachable, report the connectivity issue and try again next interval. Do not assume training is broken.
- Gradually increase check interval when healthy (10 -> 20 -> 30 -> 60 min). Reset to 10 min after any anomaly.
- This skill is meant to be automated via a recurring scheduler. If the user wants ongoing monitoring, set up the best local mechanism available instead of waiting for manual reruns.

## Recurring Setup Example

```text
After training is confirmed stable:
  Create a recurring job (cron, task scheduler, tmux loop, etc.)
  that runs `/training-check <entity>/<project>/<run_id>` every 10 minutes.
```

As the check interval increases, update the old recurring job to match the new interval.