Name: azure-resource-manager-redis-dotnet
Rating: 55.2 (1 reviews)
Author: administrakt0r

Blog Docs Log in Get started

azure-resource-manager-redis-dotnet

Azure Resource Manager SDK for Redis in .NET.

Quality

62%

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 ./plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills-claude/skills/azure-resource-manager-redis-dotnet/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is azure-resource-manager-redis-dotnet in administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills

Quality

Content

76%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 content is highly actionable with comprehensive executable C# examples and a clear, well-organized structure, but it provides no validation checkpoints around its destructive operations and inlines a large amount of reference material that could be progressively disclosed into separate files.

Suggestions

Add explicit confirmation/validation steps before destructive operations (e.g. verify cache name and resource group before DeleteAsync, and confirm before ForceRebootAsync/RegenerateKeyAsync).

Move inline version/API numbers out of the main flow or into a clearly labeled 'current versions' note so time-sensitive data does not bloat the always-loaded context.

Split the SKU reference, Key Types reference, and full workflow catalog into one-level-deep reference files (e.g. references/skus.md, references/types.md) with brief pointers from SKILL.md.

Replace the generic 'When to Use' placeholder with concrete trigger guidance or remove the section.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is largely lean, using terse intros plus code/tables and avoiding explanation of concepts Claude already knows, but inline time-sensitive values ('Current Version: 1.5.1', 'API Version: 2024-11-01') and a filler 'When to Use' section are minor trimmable tokens. It is not a 5 because of those padding/time-sensitive bits, and not a 3 because the bulk is efficient rather than noticeably verbose.	4 / 5
Actionability	Each of the ten workflows provides complete, copy-paste-ready C# with real API calls and payloads, and the SKU/type reference tables give concrete values for common cases. It is not a 4 because there are no meaningful execution gaps — the examples fully cover create/get/update/delete/keys/firewall/schedule/import-export/reboot.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Workflows are clearly numbered and sequenced, but destructive operations (Delete Redis Cache, Force Reboot, Regenerate Access Keys) lack explicit validation/confirmation checkpoints, so per the rubric's destructive-operations cap workflow_clarity cannot exceed 3. It is not a 2 because the sequence is well-defined with error-handling guidance, and not a 4 because the validation gap is material rather than minor.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	No bundle files exist (references/scripts/assets absent) and the single-file body is well organized with clear, hierarchically-ordered section headers. It is not a 5 because the ~360-line monolith inlines reference material (SKU tables, full type list, many code samples) that could be split into one-level-deep reference files, and not a 3 because the existing structure is genuinely navigable rather than disorganized.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 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 concise and names a specific, distinguishable niche, but it states only what the SDK is without listing concrete actions or providing any 'Use when' trigger guidance. This leaves it under-specified for triggering and capability communication.

Suggestions

Add 2-3 concrete actions, e.g. 'Provision and manage Azure Cache for Redis resources, configure firewall rules, and rotate access keys'.

Append an explicit 'Use when...' clause naming natural triggers like 'provisioning Azure Redis caches', 'managing ARM Redis resources', or '.NET Redis management'.

Disambiguate from the data plane by noting this is the management/ARM SDK, not StackExchange.Redis for data operations.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description 'Azure Resource Manager SDK for Redis in .NET.' names the domain clearly but lists no concrete actions (no 'provision', 'create caches', 'manage firewall rules'), matching the 'names the domain but actions are minimal or generic' anchor. It is not a 1 because the domain is concrete, and not a 3 because no actions are enumerated.	2 / 5
Completeness	There is a clear 'what' (the ARM SDK for Redis in .NET) but no 'Use when...' or equivalent trigger guidance, so per the rubric guideline completeness is capped at 3. It is not a 2 because the 'what' is explicit rather than vague, and not a 4 because 'when' is entirely missing rather than weakly present.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	It surfaces real natural terms a user would say ('Azure', 'Resource Manager', 'Redis', '.NET') but misses common variations like 'cache', 'provision', or 'manage'. It is not a 4 because key operational phrasings users actually request are absent, and not a 2 because several natural domain keywords are present rather than only generic language.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The Azure ARM + Redis + .NET combination is a clear niche with minimal conflict risk, though it has minor overlap with the data-plane StackExchange.Redis SDK that the description does not disambiguate. It is not a 5 because explicit trigger phrasing is absent, and not a 3 because the niche is far more specific than broad 'document/code' overlap examples.	4 / 5
	Total	12 / 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
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-resource-manager-redis-dotnet/SKILL.md
Commit: 57c135b

Reviewed: 19 hours 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.