CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

azure-resource-manager-postgresql-dotnet

Azure PostgreSQL Flexible Server SDK for .NET. Database management for PostgreSQL Flexible Server deployments.

Quality

64%

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 ./skills/azure-resource-manager-postgresql-dotnet/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

65%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.

This is a highly actionable reference skill with complete, executable code for all common Azure PostgreSQL Flexible Server management tasks. Its weaknesses are structural and hygiene: no reference bundle (everything inlined in one large file), no validation around destructive operations like server deletion, and some token waste from version pins, re-taught concept tables, and a vacuous 'When to Use' line.

Suggestions

Add verification checkpoints around destructive/state-changing operations — e.g., confirm the server exists and print its state before DeleteAsync, and verify the restored server's CreateMode/source after point-in-time restore.

Move the Key Types, SKU Tiers, Versions, HA Modes, and Related SDKs tables into a references/ file (e.g., reference.md) and link to it from SKILL.md to enable progressive disclosure.

Remove the version/API-version pins or place them in a clearly labeled section, and delete the empty-calorie 'When to Use' sentence and the generic HA/SKU explanatory rows Claude already knows.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly efficient — the body is dominated by tight, executable code rather than prose — but there are unnecessary additions: time-sensitive version pins ("Current Version: v1.2.0", "API Version: 2023-12-01-preview") not in a deprecated/old-patterns section, an explanatory High Availability Modes table re-teaching known concepts, generic SKU-tier use-case rows, and the vacuous trailing line "This skill is applicable to execute the workflow or actions described in the overview." Not a 4 or 5 because these padded sections and hard-coded versions cost tokens without adding SDK-specific value.

3 / 5

Actionability

All 11 core workflows are given as complete, copy-paste-ready C# with real type names (PostgreSqlFlexibleServerData, Sku, Storage, AuthConfig), plus concrete error handling (RequestFailedException with status-code filters) and working connection-string examples including Entra ID token acquisition. This matches the 'fully executable; copy-paste ready code or commands; specific examples cover the common cases' anchor exactly.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Workflows are well sequenced (server → database → firewall → configuration) and an error-handling section exists, but destructive and state-changing operations lack any verification checkpoints: Delete Server has no pre-check or confirmation, and the create/restore/replica operations never validate the resulting state before proceeding. Per the rubric, missing validation in destructive/batch database operations caps workflow_clarity at 3. Not a 2 because the sequence itself is clear and error handling is at least addressed in a dedicated section.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist and everything is inlined in a ~430-line SKILL.md: a Key Types reference table, SKU/version/HA reference tables, Related SDKs, and reference links — material that belongs in separate reference files. Section headers are clear and navigation is possible, so it rises above level 2's headerless wall, but the absence of any one-level-deep reference files and the inlined API-reference bulk fit the 'content that should be separate is inline' anchor at 3.

3 / 5

Total

14

/

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 is short, specific to a well-defined niche, and free of fluff, but it is essentially a bare domain statement. It lists no concrete management actions and completely lacks a 'Use when...' trigger clause, so users and Claude have little guidance on when to invoke it.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g., "Use when creating, configuring, scaling, or restoring Azure PostgreSQL Flexible Server instances with C#/.NET, or when the user mentions Azure Database for PostgreSQL."

Enumerate 2-4 concrete capabilities (create servers and databases, configure firewall rules and Entra ID admins, point-in-time restore, read replicas) instead of the generic "Database management".

Include natural synonyms such as "Postgres", "C#", and "Azure Database for PostgreSQL" to broaden trigger coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain precisely ("Azure PostgreSQL Flexible Server SDK for .NET") but the only action stated is the generic phrase "Database management" — no concrete operations like create/configure/restore servers are listed, matching the 'names the domain but actions are minimal or generic' anchor. It is not a 3 because fewer than 1-2 truly concrete actions are enumerated, and not a 1 because the domain is specific rather than abstract.

2 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is clear (a .NET SDK for managing PostgreSQL Flexible Server deployments) but there is no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance, which caps completeness at 3 per the judging guidelines. Not a 2 because the 'what' is concrete and unambiguous rather than vague; not a 4 because 'when' is entirely absent rather than merely implicit-and-specific.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Relevant keywords users would naturally say are present ("Azure", "PostgreSQL", "Flexible Server", ".NET", "SDK", "database management"), but common variations and synonyms are missing — e.g., "Postgres", "C#", "provisioning", or mention of specific tasks like firewall or replica management. Fits the 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms' anchor rather than level 4's 'good keyword coverage'.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The Azure PostgreSQL Flexible Server niche is well-defined and triggers (Azure + PostgreSQL + .NET management) are fairly distinct, with only minor overlap risk against closely related skills such as the Azure MySQL SDK or the Npgsql data-access library. Not a 5 because the description does not clarify management-plane vs data-access scope, leaving some ambiguity with Npgsql-related requests.

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

skills/azure-resource-manager-postgresql-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.