Name: azure-servicebus-ts
Rating: 55.2 (1 reviews)
Author: administrakt0r

Blog Docs Log in Get started

azure-servicebus-ts

Enterprise messaging with queues, topics, and subscriptions.

Quality

62%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills-claude/skills/azure-servicebus-ts/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is azure-servicebus-ts in administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills

Quality

Content

80%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 a strong, lean, executable reference with excellent code coverage and conciseness. Its weaknesses are the lack of validation checkpoints around destructive/batch operations (capping workflow clarity) and dangling reference pointers with no real bundle files (capping progressive disclosure).

Suggestions

Add explicit validation/verification checkpoints for destructive and batch operations, e.g. confirm message counts after batch sends and verify DLQ processing before completing messages.

Resolve the "Reference Documentation" bullets into actual linked files under references/ (with paths like [Queues vs Topics Patterns](references/queues-topics-patterns.md)), or remove the bullets if no detail files exist.

Consider moving the extensive type/feature catalog (sessions, deferral, peek, scheduled messages) into a one-level-deep reference file to keep SKILL.md as an overview.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and almost entirely executable code with section headers, assuming Claude's competence and never explaining basic concepts (what a queue/DLQ is); every section earns its place, matching the "Lean and efficient" anchor.	5 / 5
Actionability	Copy-paste-ready TypeScript covers send (single/batch), receive, subscribe, topics, sessions, DLQ, scheduled messages, deferral, peek, and receive modes, plus concrete install/env setup, matching "Fully executable; copy-paste ready code covering common cases."	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The body is a reference catalog of independent snippets rather than a sequenced multi-step process, and destructive/batch operations (DLQ processing, batch sends, dead-lettering) lack validation checkpoints, triggering the rubric cap at 3; not a 4 because no explicit checkpoints or feedback loops exist.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Section headers give good structure, but all content is inlined in a single ~230-line file and the two "Reference Documentation" bullets are dangling (no file links, and the references/ directory does not exist), fitting "references present but not clearly signaled; content that should be separate is inline."	3 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Description

45%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 the domain's core constructs but omits any concrete actions and lacks a "Use when..." trigger clause, capping completeness. It also fails to name "Azure Service Bus", which weakens both trigger coverage and distinctiveness.

Suggestions

Lead with concrete verbs, e.g. "Send, receive, and subscribe to messages on Azure Service Bus queues, topics, and subscriptions."

Add an explicit trigger clause such as "Use when the user mentions Azure Service Bus, service bus queues/topics/subscriptions, or enterprise messaging in TypeScript."

Include the product name "Azure Service Bus" and synonyms/extensions (e.g. service-bus, @azure/service-bus) to improve distinctiveness and trigger-term coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The phrase "Enterprise messaging with queues, topics, and subscriptions" names the domain and concrete constructs but states no actions at all (no verbs), matching the anchor "Names the domain but actions are minimal or generic"; it is not a 3 because it lacks even one concrete action like 'send' or 'receive'.	2 / 5
Completeness	A clear "what" is given (enterprise messaging with queues/topics/subscriptions) but there is no "Use when..." trigger clause, which per the rubric caps completeness at 3; not a 4 because the "when" is entirely missing rather than weakly implied.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Natural terms a user would say are present ("messaging", "queues", "topics", "subscriptions"), but the primary product name "Azure Service Bus" and common synonyms are absent, leaving keyword coverage partial rather than comprehensive.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Queues/topics/subscriptions narrow it to pub/sub messaging but without naming "Azure Service Bus" it could overlap with other messaging skills, fitting "Somewhat specific but could still overlap with similar skills"; not a 4 because the missing product name raises overlap risk.	3 / 5
	Total	11 / 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-servicebus-ts/SKILL.md
Commit: 57c135b

Reviewed: 20 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.