Add WFGY ProblemMap for RAG/LLM failure analysis (16-mode taxonomy)

[onestardao]

This PR adds WFGY ProblemMap to the Evaluation & Monitoring section.

• Repo: https://github.com/onestardao/WFGY
• Entry: https://github.com/onestardao/WFGY/blob/main/ProblemMap/README.md
• Description in list: "RAG failure analysis and debugging taxonomy (16-mode troubleshooting map for production LLM/RAG systems)."

Why it fits this section

• Focuses on production RAG / LLM systems, complementing existing evaluation frameworks by mapping recurring failure modes (retrieval, chunking, vector stores, prompt wiring, deployment edge cases, etc.) into a practical 16-mode taxonomy.
• Designed as a debugging companion to existing logging / observability tools, rather than a competing framework, so it naturally belongs under Evaluation & Monitoring.
• MIT-licensed and already used as a reference checklist in multiple open-source RAG stacks and academic / curated lists focused on robust LLM pipelines.

Notes on the change

• Added a single entry under Evaluation & Monitoring.
• Kept the description short and consistent with the existing style.
• Preserved alphabetical ordering (the new entry is placed after VLMEvalKit as WFGY ProblemMap).

[zhimin-z]

Thank you for your interest in contributing. Unfortunately, this PR does not meet our current contribution scope. We appreciate the effort, but we are only interested in too inclusion.

@axsaucedo maybe we should have new list for oss tutorial, cookbook etc.?

[onestardao]

Thanks for the clarification.

Just to note — while it may look like a taxonomy, this is intended to function as a practical debugging tool for RAG systems, since each failure mode is paired with concrete fix strategies.

This submission was kept minimal on purpose. Happy to adjust the format if a more tool-oriented presentation is preferred.

[axsaucedo]

@axsaucedo maybe we should have new list for oss tutorial, cookbook etc.?

@zhimin-z This sounds like it could be really interesting...

This could be a really massive list tho, but definitely could be interesting - what did you have in mind?

[zhimin-z]

@axsaucedo maybe we should have new list for oss tutorial, cookbook etc.?

@zhimin-z This sounds like it could be really interesting...

This could be a really massive list tho, but definitely could be interesting - what did you have in mind?

I was thinking there might be an opportunity to curate practical learning resources around agentic systems — things like cookbooks, tutorials, hands-on guides, and teaching materials.

There seem to be two possible directions:

1. Integrate into the existing list.
   We could introduce a new section (e.g., Cookbook / Tutorials / Learning Resources) inside the awesome-agentic-systems list to highlight practical, implementation-oriented materials.

2. Spin out a dedicated list.
   Alternatively, we could maintain a separate curated list specifically for practical resources, something like awesome-ml-production-cookbook (or awesome-agentic-cookbook). This could focus on step-by-step guides, reproducible workflows, and engineering tutorials for building agentic systems in practice.

The second option might scale better if the number of resources grows quickly, while the first keeps everything centralized and easier to browse.

Curious what your thoughts are — do you think this kind of practical resource curation would fit better as a section within the current list, or as its own dedicated list?

[axsaucedo]

I would say the second would make most sense - this is a "sister list" that I helped initially, we could take a similar approach? https://github.com/visenger/awesome-mlops

[zhimin-z]

I would say the second would make most sense - this is a "sister list" that I helped initially, we could take a similar approach? https://github.com/visenger/awesome-mlops

Sounds good. What should we call the new list?

[axsaucedo]

Maybe let's kick off a new issue with this topic specifically, my first question is whether it would be about prod MLOps or about Prod Agentic Systems or both or etc - based on that we can probably choose the name accordingly