multi-cloud-architecture

Design multi-cloud architectures using a decision framework to select and integrate services across AWS, Azure, and GCP. Use when building multi-cloud systems, avoiding vendor lock-in, or leveraging best-of-breed services from multiple providers.

1.07x

Quality

59%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

99%

1.07x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./tests/ext_conformance/artifacts/agents-wshobson/cloud-infrastructure/skills/multi-cloud-architecture/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is multi-cloud-architecture in wshobson/agents

Quality

Content

31%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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

The body reads as a generic cloud-knowledge reference rather than a skill: no executable guidance, heavy reliance on facts Claude already knows, and references to files that are missing from the bundle. The description promises a decision framework the body does not deliver.

Suggestions

Actually create references/service-comparison.md and references/multi-cloud-patterns.md (or remove the citations), and move the three service-comparison tables into them so SKILL.md stays a lean overview.

Replace the generic pattern bullets with the promised decision framework: concrete selection criteria (cost, data gravity, egress, compliance) with a worked example, plus executable Terraform or CLI snippets for cross-cloud integration.

Add explicit validation checkpoints and rollback guidance to the Migration Strategy phases (e.g., dual-run exit criteria, failover test commands) instead of vague 'Test thoroughly' and 'Validate functionality' bullets.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The service-mapping tables (EC2/Virtual Machines/Compute Engine, S3/Blob Storage/Cloud Storage) and best-practices list ('Follow security best practices', 'Use managed services when possible', 'Train teams on multiple clouds') restate cloud knowledge Claude already has. There are several padded sections of generic material, matching the 'noticeably verbose' anchor rather than the occasionally-untightenable one at 3.	2 / 5
Actionability	No executable code, commands, or concrete decision criteria appear anywhere in the body; the promised 'decision framework' is rendered as generic bullet lists ('Use best service from each provider', 'AI/ML on GCP'). It describes rather than instructs, sitting above the entirely-vague anchor only because the patterns and phases do direct high-level choices.	2 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The Migration Strategy section gives a real phased sequence (Assessment, Pilot, Migration, Optimization), but validation is vague ('Test thoroughly', 'Validate functionality') with no concrete checkpoints or feedback loops for a high-risk operation. Sequence present, checkpoints implicit — the anchor 3 fit.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body signals references ('See references/service-comparison.md for complete comparison', 'references/multi-cloud-patterns.md'), but no references directory or files exist in the bundle, so the pointers are broken. Meanwhile the inlined comparison tables duplicate the content those files should carry, matching the anchor for content that belongs in separate files being inlined.	2 / 5
	Total	9 / 20 Passed

Description

87%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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

A strong description: concrete capability statement, explicit 'Use when' triggers with natural terminology, and a clearly distinct multi-cloud niche. Only minor improvements possible by adding synonyms like cloud-agnostic or portability.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names concrete actions ('select and integrate services across AWS, Azure, and GCP') plus the design activity, with only minor gaps such as cost comparison being absent from the description. It lists several specific actions rather than the 1-2 of the anchor below, but is not comprehensive enough for a 5.	4 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly answers both what ('Design multi-cloud architectures using a decision framework to select and integrate services') and when ('Use when building multi-cloud systems, avoiding vendor lock-in, or leveraging best-of-breed services'), with three concrete trigger phrases matching the top anchor.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Natural user phrases like 'multi-cloud', 'vendor lock-in', 'best-of-breed', and the three provider names are present. Common synonyms such as 'cloud migration', 'cloud-agnostic', or 'portability' are missing, keeping it below a 5.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	'Multi-cloud' combined with AWS/Azure/GCP and lock-in framing carves a clear niche with distinct triggers, unlikely to fire for single-cloud or general architecture skills.	5 / 5
	Total	18 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

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 — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
referenced_paths_exist	Referenced path issues: 4 missing	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: Dicklesworthstone/pi_agent_rust
Path: tests/ext_conformance/artifacts/agents-wshobson/cloud-infrastructure/skills/multi-cloud-architecture/SKILL.md
Commit: a65ce00

Reviewed: 6 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.