CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

cloud-devops

Cloud infrastructure and DevOps workflow covering AWS, Azure, GCP, Kubernetes, Terraform, CI/CD, monitoring, and cloud-native development.

32

Quality

26%

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/cloud-devops/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

21%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 skill is essentially a table of contents or routing document that delegates everything to other skills without providing any concrete, executable guidance of its own. It is highly verbose and repetitive, following the same template across 7 phases without adding substantive value. The complete absence of actual commands, code, configuration examples, or validation steps makes it nearly useless as actionable instruction.

Suggestions

Replace vague action items like 'Configure networking' with concrete examples: actual Terraform snippets, kubectl commands, or cloud CLI commands that demonstrate the specific task.

Add validation checkpoints to each phase—e.g., after infrastructure provisioning, include 'terraform plan' review and 'terraform apply' verification steps with expected outputs.

Consolidate the repetitive phase structure; instead of 7 nearly identical sections, provide a concise workflow overview table and only expand phases that require detailed, non-obvious guidance.

Remove the 'Copy-Paste Prompts' sections entirely—'Use @skill-name to do X' adds no value—and instead provide actual decision criteria for when to use each sub-skill.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The skill is heavily padded with repetitive structure across 7 phases, each following the same template of 'Skills to Invoke / Actions / Copy-Paste Prompts.' The actions are vague one-liners like 'Design cloud architecture' and 'Set up accounts and billing' that add no value Claude doesn't already know. The 'Copy-Paste Prompts' sections are trivially obvious delegations. The entire document could be condensed to a fraction of its size.

2 / 5

Actionability

There is no concrete, executable guidance anywhere in this skill. No actual commands, no code snippets, no configuration examples, no Terraform HCL, no Dockerfile content, no YAML manifests. Every 'action' is a vague directive like 'Configure networking' or 'Set up metrics collection.' The 'Copy-Paste Prompts' are just 'Use @skill-name to do X' which are not actionable instructions.

1 / 5

Workflow Clarity

While there is a rough phased sequence (infrastructure → containers → CI/CD → monitoring → security → cost → DR), the steps within each phase are vague and lack any validation checkpoints. For operations involving infrastructure provisioning, deployment, and security configuration—all potentially destructive—there are no feedback loops, no verification steps, and no error recovery guidance. The Quality Gates checklist at the end is superficial.

2 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The skill references many sub-skills by name, which implies a delegation structure. However, no bundle files are provided, so we can't verify these references resolve. The document itself is organized into clear sections and phases, but it inlines a lot of repetitive content that could be better structured. The references to related workflow bundles at the end are a positive signal but lack links or paths.

3 / 5

Total

8

/

20

Passed

Description

32%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 reads as a topic listing rather than a functional skill description. It names many technologies but fails to specify what concrete actions the skill performs (no verbs) and completely lacks a 'when to use' clause. The extreme breadth covering all major cloud providers and DevOps tools makes it poorly distinguishable from more focused skills.

Suggestions

Add concrete action verbs describing what the skill does, e.g., 'Provisions cloud infrastructure, writes Terraform configurations, sets up CI/CD pipelines, configures Kubernetes deployments, and troubleshoots cloud services.'

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with trigger phrases, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about deploying to AWS/Azure/GCP, writing infrastructure as code, configuring containers, or setting up deployment pipelines.'

Consider narrowing scope or adding boundary language to reduce conflict risk with more specialized cloud/DevOps skills, e.g., specifying whether this is for architecture design, hands-on configuration, or troubleshooting.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain (cloud infrastructure/DevOps) and lists technology names (AWS, Azure, GCP, Kubernetes, Terraform, CI/CD, monitoring), but does not describe any concrete actions—no verbs like 'deploy', 'configure', 'provision', or 'troubleshoot'.

2 / 5

Completeness

Provides a vague 'what' (covering cloud infrastructure and DevOps workflow) but has no 'when' clause at all—no 'Use when...' or equivalent trigger guidance, which per the rubric should cap completeness at 3, and the 'what' itself is too vague to reach 3.

2 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes several relevant technology keywords (AWS, Azure, GCP, Kubernetes, Terraform, CI/CD, monitoring, cloud-native) that users might mention, but lacks natural user phrases like 'deploy', 'provision', 'infrastructure as code', 'Docker', 'containers', 'pipelines', 'helm', or 'serverless'.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The description is extremely broad, covering three major cloud providers, Kubernetes, Terraform, CI/CD, monitoring, and cloud-native development all in one skill. This breadth creates high overlap risk with any skill focused on a specific cloud provider, container orchestration, or CI/CD pipelines.

2 / 5

Total

9

/

20

Passed

Validation

90%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation10 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

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

Warning

Total

10

/

11

Passed

Repository
administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills
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.