jbvc/backend-dev-guidelines
Opinionated backend development standards for Node.js + Express + TypeScript microservices. Covers layered architecture, BaseController pattern, dependency injection, Prisma repositories, Zod validation, unifiedConfig, Sentry error tracking, async safety, and testing discipline.
71
71%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Quality
Discovery
82%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a strong description with excellent specificity and trigger term coverage for its target audience of backend developers. The main weakness is the absence of an explicit 'Use when...' clause, which would help Claude know exactly when to select this skill. The rich set of technology-specific terms makes it highly distinctive and unlikely to conflict with other skills.
Suggestions
Add a 'Use when...' clause such as 'Use when building or modifying Node.js/Express/TypeScript microservices, setting up API controllers, configuring Prisma repositories, or establishing backend architecture patterns.'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions and patterns: BaseController pattern, dependency injection, Prisma repositories, Zod validation, unifiedConfig, Sentry error tracking, async safety, and testing discipline. These are highly specific technical capabilities. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers 'what does this do' with detailed coverage of patterns and tools, but lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance. Per rubric guidelines, missing 'Use when' caps completeness at 2. | 2 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes many natural keywords a developer would use: Node.js, Express, TypeScript, microservices, Prisma, Zod, Sentry, dependency injection, validation, testing. These are terms developers naturally mention when working in this stack. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive due to the specific technology stack (Node.js + Express + TypeScript) combined with specific patterns (BaseController, Prisma, Zod, unifiedConfig, Sentry). This is unlikely to conflict with other skills given its narrow, opinionated scope. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
64%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a solid opinionated backend standards skill with strong actionability — concrete code examples, clear do/don't patterns, and specific architectural rules. Its main weaknesses are moderate verbosity (the BFRI framework and some explanatory framing add bulk), a monolithic structure that could benefit from splitting detailed reference material into separate files, and a lack of explicit feedback loops in the development workflow despite covering production-critical operations.
Suggestions
Trim the BFRI section significantly or move it to a separate reference file — the formula and scoring table add ~30 lines for a pre-implementation assessment that could be a brief checklist instead.
Remove framing/persona text ('You are a senior backend engineer', 'not merely suggestions', the Status section) — these consume tokens without adding actionable guidance.
Add an explicit feedback loop to the validation checklist: e.g., 'If any check fails → fix → re-run checklist before proceeding' to strengthen workflow clarity for production-critical changes.
Split detailed reference content (naming conventions table, directory structure, anti-patterns list) into a separate REFERENCE.md and link from the main skill to improve progressive disclosure.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is reasonably structured but includes some unnecessary framing ('You are a senior backend engineer', 'not merely suggestions', status badges) and the BFRI section adds significant weight for a scoring framework Claude doesn't need explained at length. Several sections explain concepts Claude already knows (what DI is, what layered architecture means). | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides concrete, executable TypeScript code examples for nearly every rule — routes, controllers, services, repositories, Zod validation, asyncErrorWrapper, Sentry usage, and unifiedConfig. The do/don't patterns with ❌/✅ are immediately actionable and copy-paste ready. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The skill clearly defines the layered architecture sequence and includes a validation checklist at the end, but lacks explicit feedback loops for error recovery. The BFRI assessment is a pre-implementation step but there's no clear 'if validation fails, do X' workflow for the actual development process. For a skill involving architectural decisions and production deployments, the absence of iterative validation steps caps this at 2. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Section 12 references other skills but the main content is a monolithic document with 14 sections inline. The directory structure, naming conventions, anti-patterns list, and detailed BFRI framework could be split into referenced files. The document is well-sectioned internally but everything is in one large file when some content would benefit from separation. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
Reviewed
Table of Contents