CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

azure-mgmt-arizeaiobservabilityeval-dotnet

Azure Resource Manager SDK for Arize AI Observability and Evaluation (.NET).

Quality

66%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills-claude/skills/azure-mgmt-arizeaiobservabilityeval-dotnet/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is azure-mgmt-arizeaiobservabilityeval-dotnet in administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

68%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 is a strong, executable CRUD reference with copy-paste-ready code covering the full resource lifecycle, and its section structure is clean. Its weaknesses are filler sections that pad token cost without adding information, and the absence of validation around the destructive delete and long-running create operations. Trimming the 'When to Use' and generic best-practices filler and adding pre-delete verification would raise both conciseness and workflow clarity.

Suggestions

Delete the 'When to Use' section — 'This skill is applicable to execute the workflow or actions described in the overview.' conveys no information; move any real trigger guidance into the frontmatter description.

Add a validation checkpoint before destructive operations, e.g. check `GetIfExistsAsync` or `ProvisioningState` before `DeleteAsync`, and show how to poll a long-running CreateOrUpdate to `ProvisioningState == Succeeded`.

Trim best-practices items that restate .NET fundamentals ('Use async methods', 'Close clients properly') and keep only SDK-specific guidance like the GetIfExistsAsync and resource-identifier patterns.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly efficient (code-heavy CRUD examples, compact tables), but includes unnecessary padding: the 'When to Use' section is pure filler ('This skill is applicable to execute the workflow or actions described in the overview.') and several 'Best Practices' items restate .NET basics Claude already knows ('Use async methods', 'Close clients properly'). This matches anchor 3 ('mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation or could be tightened') rather than 4, which requires only minor trimmable instances.

3 / 5

Actionability

All guidance is fully executable, copy-paste-ready C#: installation command, DefaultAzureCredential setup, complete CreateOrUpdateAsync with populated data models, Get/Exists/GetIfExists variants, list loops, patch update, delete, error handling by status code, and direct resource-identifier access. The common cases (full CRUD lifecycle) are covered with concrete code, matching anchor 5.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The workflow is clearly sequenced (auth → subscription/resource group → collection → CRUD) with a dedicated error-handling section, but the destructive DeleteAsync operation has no verification or confirmation step (e.g., check existence or ProvisioningState before deleting), and CreateOrUpdate has no post-creation validation of provisioning state. Per the judging guidelines, missing validation in destructive workflows caps workflow clarity at 3 — this cap applies despite otherwise solid sequencing.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

There are no bundle files (no references/, scripts/, or assets/ directories) and no referenced external files, so the skill is judged as a single-file structure. Sections are well-organized and clearly labeled (Installation, Authentication, Core Workflow, Key Types, Enums, Error Handling), appropriate for a ~230-line SDK reference; the minor gap is that the Key Types and Enums tables are inline reference material that could live in a separate file if the bundle grew. This matches anchor 4 ('good structure; most content is appropriately placed; minor organization gaps').

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

48%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.

The description identifies a specific, distinctive product niche but tells the model nothing about what actions the SDK performs or when to reach for it. It reads as a package label rather than a trigger-optimized capability description. Adding concrete verbs (create, read, update, delete Arize organizations) and an explicit 'Use when...' clause would move it into the good-example territory.

Suggestions

Add 2-3 concrete actions to the description, e.g. 'Create, read, update, and delete Arize AI Observability and Evaluation organization resources on Azure' instead of the noun-only 'SDK for...' phrasing.

Append an explicit trigger clause such as 'Use when managing Arize AI organizations in Azure, configuring Azure Marketplace purchases for Arize, or working with the ArizeAIObservabilityEval .NET package.'

Include natural user-facing synonyms (Arize organization, Arize deployment, Azure Liftr resource) so the description matches how users actually phrase requests.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names a concrete domain ("Azure Resource Manager SDK for Arize AI Observability and Evaluation (.NET)") but contains no action verbs whatsoever — no managing, creating, or deploying is stated. It names the domain with minimal/generic actions, matching anchor 2 rather than 3 (which requires 1-2 concrete actions) or 1 (which requires entirely vague abstract language).

2 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is clear (an SDK for a named Azure product) but there is no 'when' — no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which per judging guidelines caps completeness at 3. It is not 2 because the 'what' is specific rather than vague, and not 4 because no 'when' guidance exists at all.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Relevant keywords are present ("Azure", "Resource Manager", "Arize AI", "Observability and Evaluation", ".NET", "SDK") but natural user phrases like "manage Arize resources" or "create an Arize organization on Azure" and common variations are missing. This matches anchor 3 ('some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms') — above anchor 2 (only one or two generic keywords) and below anchor 4 (good coverage with only a few natural terms missing).

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The niche is clear and specific (Arize AI Observability and Evaluation on Azure via .NET), giving minimal conflict risk with unrelated skills. It is not 5 because distinctiveness rests solely on the product name within a generic 'Azure Resource Manager SDK for X (.NET)' template that many sibling Azure ARM skills share, so a user asking generically about Azure SDKs could match multiple skills.

4 / 5

Total

12

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills

Path

plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills-claude/skills/azure-mgmt-arizeaiobservabilityeval-dotnet/SKILL.md

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.