backend-dev-guidelines

You are a senior backend engineer operating production-grade services under strict architectural and reliability constraints. Use when routes, controllers, services, repositories, express middleware, or prisma database access.

Quality

66%

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/backend-dev-guidelines/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is backend-dev-guidelines in sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills

Quality

Content

67%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 well-structured, actionable backend doctrine with concrete TypeScript patterns, a gated BFRI assessment, and an operator checklist, scoring well on actionability and workflow. Its weaknesses are conciseness (a duplicated section and a vacuous closing line) and minor self-referential organization gaps.

Suggestions

Remove the second 'When to Use' section (lines ~346-348) and its generic closing sentence; the earlier 'When to Use' already covers triggers.

Fix section numbering (the document jumps from 'When to Use' to '3. Core Architecture Doctrine' with no section 2) and dedupe the duplicated 'When to Use' heading.

Briefly define or link the BaseController helpers (handleSuccess/handleError) so the controller example is fully executable rather than referencing an undefined base class.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The doctrine is mostly lean with code examples and tables, but the duplicated 'When to Use' section, the generic vacuous closing line ('This skill is applicable to execute the workflow or actions described in the overview.'), and the missing section-2 numbering are noticeable padding/organization waste that could be trimmed.	3 / 5
Actionability	Concrete, copy-pasteable TypeScript patterns (BaseController usage, DI constructors, Zod schemas, Prisma repository methods) plus strict naming and directory tables give mostly executable guidance; minor gaps like the undefined BaseController.handleSuccess/handleError helpers keep it below 5.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The BFRI assessment provides a gated pre-implementation decision (refactor/redesign before coding) and the Operator Validation Checklist supplies explicit checkpoints; it stops short of a tight validate→fix→retry feedback loop, so not a 5.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	No bundle files exist, so the self-contained body is judged on organization; 14 clearly headed sections with no nested references is good structure, but the duplicated 'When to Use' and the missing section-2 number are minor organization gaps.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Description

65%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 explicitly pairs a backend-engineering 'what' with a concrete 'Use when' trigger list of natural layer/technology terms, making it largely actionable and distinct. Its main weaknesses are the second-person voice (rubric-penalized) and an abstract 'what' that describes a role and constraints rather than concrete actions.

Suggestions

Rewrite in third person and lead with concrete actions, e.g. 'Writes and reviews Node.js/Express/TypeScript backend code following a routes→controllers→services→repositories layering.'

Broaden trigger coverage with common synonyms users say: 'API endpoints, controllers, middleware, ORM/Prisma models, schema migrations, validation.'

Tighten the 'what' to enumerate what the skill actually does (enforces layering, Zod validation, Sentry error capture, unifiedConfig, DI) instead of describing a persona.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the backend/production-services domain and constraints via the layer list, but the stated action ('operating production-grade services under strict architectural and reliability constraints') is abstract rather than a concrete action list; reduced by 1 per the rubric's second-person voice penalty ('You are a senior backend engineer').	2 / 5
Completeness	Both 'what' (a senior backend engineer operating production services under constraints) and 'when' ('Use when routes, controllers, services, repositories, express middleware, or prisma database access') are present; the 'what' is role-based rather than a concrete action enumeration, keeping it below 5.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	'routes, controllers, services, repositories, express middleware, or prisma database access' are natural backend terms a user would say; a few common synonyms (API endpoints, ORM, schema, migrations) are absent, so not a 5.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The Express/Prisma/layered-backend niche is mostly distinct with specific triggers, but it overlaps with sibling skills referenced in the body (frontend-dev-guidelines, error-tracking, database-verification), so not a 5.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 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/backend-dev-guidelines/SKILL.md
Commit: 57c135b

Reviewed: 21 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.