microservices-architect
tessl i github:Jeffallan/claude-skills --skill microservices-architectUse when designing distributed systems, decomposing monoliths, or implementing microservices patterns. Invoke for service boundaries, DDD, saga patterns, event sourcing, service mesh, distributed tracing.
63%
Overall
Validation
Implementation
Activation
Validation
94%| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
skill_md_line_count | SKILL.md line count is 90 (<= 500) | Pass |
frontmatter_valid | YAML frontmatter is valid | Pass |
name_field | 'name' field is valid: 'microservices-architect' | Pass |
description_field | 'description' field is valid (204 chars) | Pass |
description_voice | 'description' uses third person voice | Pass |
description_trigger_hint | Description includes an explicit trigger hint | Pass |
compatibility_field | 'compatibility' field not present (optional) | Pass |
allowed_tools_field | 'allowed-tools' field not present (optional) | Pass |
metadata_version | 'metadata.version' is present: 1.0.0 | Pass |
metadata_field | 'metadata' contains 8 entries | Pass |
license_field | 'license' field is present: MIT | Pass |
frontmatter_unknown_keys | No unknown frontmatter keys found | Pass |
body_present | SKILL.md body is present | Pass |
body_examples | No examples detected (no code fences and no 'Example' wording) | Warning |
body_output_format | Output/return/format terms detected | Pass |
body_steps | Step-by-step structure detected (ordered list) | Pass |
Total | 15 / 16 Passed |
Implementation
42%This skill functions as a high-level architectural checklist but lacks the concrete, executable guidance needed for actionability. It excels at progressive disclosure with a well-organized reference table, but the content reads more like a role description than actionable instructions. The absence of any code examples, specific commands, or concrete implementation patterns significantly limits its practical utility.
Suggestions
- Add concrete code examples for key patterns (e.g., a circuit breaker implementation in a specific language, a saga orchestration example, correlation ID middleware)
- Replace abstract instructions like 'Implement circuit breakers for external calls' with specific, executable guidance showing the actual implementation
- Add validation checkpoints to the Core Workflow (e.g., 'Verify bounded contexts by checking: no shared data, clear API contracts, independent deployability')
- Remove the role-playing framing ('You are a senior microservices architect with 15+ years...') as it adds no actionable value
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill includes some unnecessary framing ('Senior distributed systems architect with 15+ years of experience') and explains concepts Claude already knows (what DDD is, what circuit breakers are). The 'When to Use This Skill' section largely duplicates the description. However, the constraint lists and reference table are reasonably efficient. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The content is almost entirely abstract guidance with no concrete code, commands, or executable examples. Phrases like 'Apply DDD to identify bounded contexts' and 'Implement circuit breakers' describe what to do but never show how. No copy-paste ready implementations are provided. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 'Core Workflow' provides a clear 6-step sequence, but lacks validation checkpoints or feedback loops. For complex distributed system design involving potentially destructive changes (decomposing monoliths), there's no guidance on how to verify each step succeeded before proceeding. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The reference table provides clear one-level-deep navigation to detailed guidance files with explicit 'Load When' conditions. The main skill serves as an overview pointing to specific reference documents for deeper topics. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 12 Passed |
Activation
72%The description excels at trigger term coverage and distinctiveness, providing excellent keywords that developers would naturally use. However, it lacks specificity about what actions the skill actually performs - it reads more like a topic list than a capability description. The 'what' component needs concrete verbs describing the skill's outputs.
Suggestions
- Add concrete action verbs at the beginning describing what the skill does, e.g., 'Designs distributed system architectures, recommends decomposition strategies, and implements microservices patterns.'
- Transform the topic list into capability statements, e.g., 'Applies DDD principles for service boundaries' rather than just listing 'DDD, service boundaries'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (distributed systems, microservices) and lists several concepts (saga patterns, event sourcing, service mesh, distributed tracing), but doesn't describe concrete actions - it lists topics rather than what the skill actually does with them. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Has a 'Use when...' clause with good trigger scenarios, but the 'what does this do' part is missing - it only lists topics/patterns without explaining what actions the skill performs (e.g., 'designs', 'analyzes', 'recommends'). | 2 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural terms users would say: 'distributed systems', 'microservices', 'monoliths', 'service boundaries', 'DDD', 'saga patterns', 'event sourcing', 'service mesh', 'distributed tracing' - these are all terms developers naturally use when seeking help in this domain. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Clear niche in distributed systems architecture with highly specific technical terms like 'saga patterns', 'event sourcing', and 'service mesh' that are unlikely to conflict with other skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Reviewed
Table of Contents
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.