jbvc/senior-architect
Comprehensive software architecture skill for designing scalable, maintainable systems using ReactJS, NextJS, NodeJS, Express, React Native, Swift, Kotlin, Flutter, Postgres, GraphQL, Go, Python. Includes architecture diagram generation, system design patterns, tech stack decision frameworks, and dependency analysis. Use when designing system architecture, making technical decisions, creating architecture diagrams, evaluating trade-offs, or defining integration patterns.
59
59%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Quality
Discovery
92%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 that clearly articulates specific capabilities, includes an explicit 'Use when' clause, and uses natural trigger terms. Its main weakness is the breadth of technologies listed, which could create overlap with more focused technology-specific skills. The description is well-structured and uses proper third-person voice throughout.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: architecture diagram generation, system design patterns, tech stack decision frameworks, dependency analysis. Also enumerates specific technologies (ReactJS, NextJS, NodeJS, etc.). | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (architecture diagram generation, system design patterns, tech stack decision frameworks, dependency analysis) and 'when' with an explicit 'Use when...' clause listing five trigger scenarios. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural trigger terms users would say: 'system architecture', 'technical decisions', 'architecture diagrams', 'trade-offs', 'integration patterns', 'tech stack'. Also lists specific technology names users would mention. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | While the architecture focus is somewhat distinct, the broad list of 12+ technologies and general terms like 'technical decisions' and 'evaluating trade-offs' could overlap with general coding skills, code review skills, or individual technology-specific skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
7%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is a hollow shell—it has the structure of a comprehensive architecture guide but contains almost no substantive content. Every section uses vague, generic language ('Deep analysis', 'Best practices built-in', 'Expert-level automation') without any concrete architecture patterns, decision frameworks, trade-off analyses, or real examples. It reads like a template that was never filled in with actual domain knowledge.
Suggestions
Replace vague feature lists with concrete examples: show actual architecture diagram output, a real decision framework (e.g., 'When to use microservices vs monolith' with specific criteria), and sample script invocations with real arguments and expected output.
Add actionable architecture decision content: include specific patterns (e.g., CQRS, event sourcing, BFF) with when/why to use each, concrete code snippets showing implementation in the listed tech stacks, and trade-off matrices.
Define actual script interfaces: document real CLI arguments, show example input/output for each script, and explain what each script produces (e.g., 'generates a Mermaid diagram of service dependencies').
Remove the generic best practices section entirely—Claude already knows to 'write clear code' and 'validate all inputs'. Replace with project-specific architectural constraints or decision records.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Extremely verbose with almost no substantive content. The skill is padded with generic platitudes ('Follow established patterns', 'Write clear code', 'Keep it simple') and vague feature lists ('Deep analysis', 'Expert-level automation', 'Production-grade output') that convey zero actionable information. Claude already knows all of these generic best practices. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | Despite referencing scripts, there are no concrete examples of what these scripts actually do, what their arguments are, or what output they produce. The commands shown are generic placeholders (e.g., `[options]`, `[arguments]`). The 'Best Practices Summary' is entirely abstract advice with no specific, executable guidance for architecture decisions. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 'Development Workflow' section lists steps but they are generic (install deps, run checks, follow docs) with no validation checkpoints, no feedback loops, and no clear sequencing for actual architecture design tasks. There's no workflow for the core purpose—designing system architecture or making technical decisions. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill does reference external files (references/architecture_patterns.md, references/system_design_workflows.md, references/tech_decision_guide.md) which is appropriate structure. However, the main file itself contains so little substantive content that it's unclear what value the overview provides, and the references are listed redundantly in multiple sections. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 5 / 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