component-boundary-identifier

Identifies boundaries between modules or components in software systems through static code analysis and dependency detection. Use when Claude needs to analyze software architecture, identify module boundaries, detect boundary violations, find circular dependencies, or assess component coupling. Supports Python (packages and imports) and Java (packages and dependencies). Trigger when users ask to "identify boundaries", "find component boundaries", "detect boundary violations", "analyze module structure", "check architecture", or "find circular dependencies".

1.20x

Quality

81%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

96%

1.20x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Quality

Content

62%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

This skill provides comprehensive coverage of boundary analysis with good workflow structure and clear severity classifications. However, it's verbose with explanatory content Claude already knows (architectural pattern definitions, basic DI concepts) and could benefit from more executable examples rather than illustrative violation snippets. The content would be stronger as a leaner overview with more detail pushed to reference files.

Suggestions

Remove explanatory content about architectural patterns (layered, hexagonal, clean) that Claude already knows - focus only on the specific rules and violation patterns unique to this skill

Add a complete executable example showing the analyze_boundaries.py script with sample input directory structure and expected JSON/text output

Move the detailed architectural patterns section and language-specific guidance to separate reference files, keeping SKILL.md focused on the workflow and quick reference

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The content is reasonably efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation that Claude would already know (e.g., explaining what layered architecture is, basic dependency injection concepts). The document could be tightened by removing explanatory text and focusing more on the specific patterns and commands.	2 / 3
Actionability	Provides some concrete guidance with code examples for violation patterns and a script command, but many examples are pseudocode-like snippets showing violations rather than executable analysis code. The actual analysis script usage is mentioned but not demonstrated with complete input/output examples.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The workflow is clearly sequenced with numbered steps (Understand Request → Analyze Structure → Identify Boundaries → Detect Violations → Report Findings). The report structure template provides a clear output format, and severity levels guide prioritization of fixes.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	References external files (boundary-indicators.md, violation-patterns.md) appropriately, but the main document is quite long with content that could be split out. The architectural patterns section and language-specific guidance could be separate reference files, keeping SKILL.md as a leaner overview.	2 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 Passed

Description

100%

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 an excellent skill description that hits all the marks. It provides specific capabilities (static analysis, dependency detection), explicit language support, comprehensive trigger terms that match natural developer language, and clear 'Use when' and 'Trigger when' clauses. The description is distinctive enough to avoid conflicts with general code analysis skills.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'static code analysis', 'dependency detection', 'identify module boundaries', 'detect boundary violations', 'find circular dependencies', 'assess component coupling'. Also specifies supported languages (Python, Java) with specific mechanisms (packages, imports, dependencies).	3 / 3
Completeness	Clearly answers both what (identifies boundaries through static code analysis and dependency detection) AND when (explicit 'Use when...' clause plus 'Trigger when users ask to...' with specific phrases). Both sections are comprehensive and explicit.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Excellent coverage of natural terms users would say: 'identify boundaries', 'find component boundaries', 'detect boundary violations', 'analyze module structure', 'check architecture', 'find circular dependencies'. These are realistic phrases developers would use when needing this functionality.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Clear niche focused on software architecture boundary analysis with distinct triggers like 'boundary violations', 'module boundaries', 'circular dependencies'. Unlikely to conflict with general code analysis or documentation skills due to specific architectural focus.	3 / 3
	Total	12 / 12 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

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.

Repository: ArabelaTso/Skills-4-SE
Commit: 0f00a4f

Reviewed: 4 months ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

Is this your skill?

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.