Organize DI registrations using IServiceCollection extension methods. Group related services into composable Add* methods for clean Program.cs and reusable configuration in tests.
72%
Does it follow best practices?
Run evals on this skill
Adds up to 20 points to the overall score
Passed
No findings from the security scan
Fix and improve this skill with Tessl
tessl review fix ./skills/microsoft-extensions-dependency-injection/SKILL.mdUse this skill when:
Without organization, Program.cs becomes unmanageable:
// BAD: 200+ lines of unorganized registrations
var builder = WebApplication.CreateBuilder(args);
builder.Services.AddScoped<IUserRepository, UserRepository>();
builder.Services.AddScoped<IOrderRepository, OrderRepository>();
builder.Services.AddScoped<IProductRepository, ProductRepository>();
builder.Services.AddScoped<IUserService, UserService>();
// ... 150 more lines ...Problems: hard to find related registrations, no clear boundaries, can't reuse in tests, merge conflicts.
Group related registrations into extension methods:
// GOOD: Clean, composable Program.cs
var builder = WebApplication.CreateBuilder(args);
builder.Services
.AddUserServices()
.AddOrderServices()
.AddEmailServices()
.AddPaymentServices()
.AddValidators();
var app = builder.Build();namespace MyApp.Users;
public static class UserServiceCollectionExtensions
{
public static IServiceCollection AddUserServices(this IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddScoped<IUserRepository, UserRepository>();
services.AddScoped<IUserReadStore, UserReadStore>();
services.AddScoped<IUserWriteStore, UserWriteStore>();
services.AddScoped<IUserService, UserService>();
services.AddScoped<IUserValidationService, UserValidationService>();
return services;
}
}namespace MyApp.Email;
public static class EmailServiceCollectionExtensions
{
public static IServiceCollection AddEmailServices(
this IServiceCollection services,
string configSectionName = "EmailSettings")
{
services.AddOptions<EmailOptions>()
.BindConfiguration(configSectionName)
.ValidateDataAnnotations()
.ValidateOnStart();
services.AddSingleton<IMjmlTemplateRenderer, MjmlTemplateRenderer>();
services.AddSingleton<IEmailLinkGenerator, EmailLinkGenerator>();
services.AddScoped<IUserEmailComposer, UserEmailComposer>();
services.AddScoped<IEmailSender, SmtpEmailSender>();
return services;
}
}Place extension methods near the services they register:
src/
MyApp.Api/
Program.cs # Composes all Add* methods
MyApp.Users/
Services/
UserService.cs
UserServiceCollectionExtensions.cs # AddUserServices()
MyApp.Orders/
OrderServiceCollectionExtensions.cs # AddOrderServices()
MyApp.Email/
EmailServiceCollectionExtensions.cs # AddEmailServices()Convention: {Feature}ServiceCollectionExtensions.cs next to the feature's services.
| Pattern | Use For |
|---|---|
Add{Feature}Services() | General feature registration |
Add{Feature}() | Short form when unambiguous |
Configure{Feature}() | When primarily setting options |
Use{Feature}() | Middleware (on IApplicationBuilder) |
The Add* pattern lets you reuse production configuration in tests and only override what's different. Works with WebApplicationFactory, Akka.Hosting.TestKit, and standalone ServiceCollection.
See advanced-patterns.md for complete testing examples.
For larger applications, compose extensions hierarchically:
public static class AppServiceCollectionExtensions
{
public static IServiceCollection AddAppServices(this IServiceCollection services)
{
return services
.AddDomainServices()
.AddInfrastructureServices()
.AddApiServices();
}
}
public static class DomainServiceCollectionExtensions
{
public static IServiceCollection AddDomainServices(this IServiceCollection services)
{
return services
.AddUserServices()
.AddOrderServices()
.AddProductServices();
}
}The same pattern works for Akka.NET actor configuration:
public static class OrderActorExtensions
{
public static AkkaConfigurationBuilder AddOrderActors(
this AkkaConfigurationBuilder builder)
{
return builder
.WithActors((system, registry, resolver) =>
{
var orderProps = resolver.Props<OrderActor>();
var orderRef = system.ActorOf(orderProps, "orders");
registry.Register<OrderActor>(orderRef);
});
}
}
// Usage in Program.cs
builder.Services.AddAkka("MySystem", (builder, sp) =>
{
builder
.AddOrderActors()
.AddInventoryActors()
.AddNotificationActors();
});See akka-hosting-actor-patterns skill for complete Akka.Hosting patterns.
// BAD: Massive Program.cs with 200+ lines of registrations// BAD: Too vague, doesn't communicate what's registered
public static IServiceCollection AddServices(this IServiceCollection services) { ... }// BAD: Buried settings
public static IServiceCollection AddDatabase(this IServiceCollection services)
{
services.AddDbContext<AppDbContext>(options =>
options.UseSqlServer("hardcoded-connection-string")); // Hidden!
}
// GOOD: Accept configuration explicitly
public static IServiceCollection AddDatabase(
this IServiceCollection services,
string connectionString)
{
services.AddDbContext<AppDbContext>(options =>
options.UseSqlServer(connectionString));
}| Practice | Benefit |
|---|---|
Group related services into Add* methods | Clean Program.cs, clear boundaries |
| Place extensions near the services they register | Easy to find and maintain |
Return IServiceCollection for chaining | Fluent API |
| Accept configuration parameters | Flexibility |
Use consistent naming (Add{Feature}Services) | Discoverability |
| Test by reusing production extensions | Confidence, less duplication |
| Lifetime | Use When | Examples |
|---|---|---|
| Singleton | Stateless, thread-safe, expensive to create | Configuration, HttpClient factories, caches |
| Scoped | Stateful per-request, database contexts | DbContext, repositories, user context |
| Transient | Lightweight, stateful, cheap to create | Validators, short-lived helpers |
// SINGLETON: Stateless services, shared safely
services.AddSingleton<IMjmlTemplateRenderer, MjmlTemplateRenderer>();
// SCOPED: Database access, per-request state
services.AddScoped<IUserRepository, UserRepository>();
// TRANSIENT: Cheap, short-lived
services.AddTransient<CreateUserRequestValidator>();Scoped services require a scope. ASP.NET Core creates one per HTTP request. In background services and actors, create scopes manually.
See advanced-patterns.md for actor scope management patterns.
// BAD: Singleton captures scoped service - stale DbContext!
public class CacheService // Registered as Singleton
{
private readonly IUserRepository _repo; // Scoped - captured at startup!
}
// GOOD: Inject IServiceProvider, create scope per operation
public class CacheService
{
private readonly IServiceProvider _serviceProvider;
public async Task<User> GetUserAsync(string id)
{
using var scope = _serviceProvider.CreateScope();
var repo = scope.ServiceProvider.GetRequiredService<IUserRepository>();
return await repo.GetByIdAsync(id);
}
}// BAD: No scope for scoped services
public class BadBackgroundService : BackgroundService
{
private readonly IOrderService _orderService; // Scoped - will throw!
}
// GOOD: Create scope for each unit of work
public class GoodBackgroundService : BackgroundService
{
private readonly IServiceScopeFactory _scopeFactory;
protected override async Task ExecuteAsync(CancellationToken ct)
{
using var scope = _scopeFactory.CreateScope();
var orderService = scope.ServiceProvider.GetRequiredService<IOrderService>();
// ...
}
}microsoft-extensions-configuration skillAaronontheweb/dotnet-skills
5ca5db8
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.