Name: application-architecture-standard
Rating: 55.2 (1 reviews)
Author: Bottelet

Blog Docs Log in Get started

application-architecture-standard

Defines structural rules for Laravel architecture, layering, and code organization

Quality

61%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.claude/skills/application-architecture-standard/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

72%

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

The body is a lean, well-organized architectural standard that respects token budget and assumes Claude's competence. Its weakness is actionability: several rules are abstract declarations with no concrete enforcement guidance or examples.

Suggestions

Make abstract rules actionable: for 'No cross-layer leakage', specify the forbidden direction (e.g. 'Controllers must not call Eloquent models directly; route through a Service').

Add a short concrete example showing a correctly layered call (Controller -> Form Request -> Service -> Model) to anchor the rules.

Provide an enforcement/check step, such as a checklist or grep pattern, to verify layer boundaries during review.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is extremely lean ('No business logic allowed.', 'Constructor injection only', 'No service locators') with no padding or explanation of concepts Claude already knows, matching the 'lean and efficient; every token earns its place' anchor.	3 / 3
Actionability	Several rules are concrete directives ('Constructor injection only', 'Services must remain framework-agnostic except for Laravel infrastructure (Eloquent, DB transactions, HTTP client, logging)'), but others are abstract ('No cross-layer leakage', 'Strict separation of concerns', 'Refactoring must preserve behavior') with no enforcement mechanism or example, fitting the 'some concrete guidance but incomplete' anchor.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The content is organized into clear numbered sections, but this is a declarative standard rather than a multi-step process, so there is no sequence or validation checkpoint to clarify; it sits above the unclear anchor but below the explicit-workflow anchor at 3.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The skill is under 50 lines with no external bundle files and is organized into well-signaled sections (Purpose, Layering Rules, Service Rules, Dependency Rules, Architecture Integrity), so per the simple-skills guideline well-organized sections alone justify a 3.	3 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Description

50%

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description is clear and uses proper third-person voice, but it only states what the skill covers without any 'Use when...' invocation guidance and lacks concrete action verbs. It lands in the mid-range on every dimension.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause naming natural triggers, e.g. 'Use when structuring a Laravel application, deciding where business logic belongs, or reviewing layering and dependency choices.'

Replace abstract nouns with concrete actions: 'Enforce layer separation, validate dependency direction, and locate where business logic, DTOs, and external services should live.'

Include common user-facing terms like 'service layer', 'where to put business logic', and 'dependency injection' to improve trigger matching.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The phrase 'Defines structural rules for Laravel architecture, layering, and code organization' names the domain (Laravel) and several areas, but does not list concrete actions (e.g. enforce layer separation, validate dependencies), matching the 'names domain and some actions, but not comprehensive' anchor rather than the multiple-concrete-actions anchor at 3.	2 / 3
Completeness	It states what the skill does ('Defines structural rules...') but provides no 'Use when...' trigger for when to invoke it, so per the guideline a missing trigger clause caps completeness at 2 rather than 3.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Terms like 'Laravel architecture', 'layering', and 'code organization' are relevant but limited; it misses common natural variations a user might say such as 'where to put business logic', 'service layer', or 'dependency injection rules', fitting the 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations' anchor.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Scoping to 'Laravel architecture' gives it a niche, but the wording could still overlap with general coding-standards or code-review skills, matching the 'somewhat specific but could still overlap' anchor rather than a clearly distinct 3.	2 / 3
	Total	8 / 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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: Bottelet/DaybydayCRM
Path: .claude/skills/application-architecture-standard/SKILL.md
Commit: fb83b36

Reviewed: 3 days 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.