CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

multi-cloud-architecture

Decision framework and patterns for architecting applications across AWS, Azure, and GCP.

40

Quality

39%

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/multi-cloud-architecture/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

42%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 reads more like a reference document or study guide than an actionable skill for Claude. It catalogs cloud service equivalencies and describes patterns at a high level, but provides no executable code, specific commands, or concrete decision-making logic. Much of the content (service comparison tables, generic best practices) is knowledge Claude already has, making the token investment inefficient.

Suggestions

Replace generic best practices lists with specific, actionable decision trees or flowcharts (e.g., 'If latency < 50ms required AND data sovereignty in EU → use Pattern 3 with GCP europe-west + Azure West Europe').

Add concrete, executable examples such as Terraform snippets for multi-cloud deployments, specific CLI commands for cost comparison queries, or actual configuration files for cloud-agnostic setups.

Include validation checkpoints in the migration workflow, such as 'Run `terraform plan` and verify no unexpected resource deletions' or 'Validate DNS failover with `dig` commands before cutover'.

Remove or drastically condense the service comparison tables (Claude already knows these mappings) and instead focus on non-obvious gotchas, compatibility issues, and decision criteria that Claude wouldn't know from training data.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The content includes useful comparison tables and patterns, but much of it is general knowledge Claude already possesses (cloud service mappings, generic best practices like 'design for failure', 'train teams'). The best practices section and cost optimization strategies are largely common knowledge that don't add unique value. The migration strategy phases are also generic project management steps.

3 / 5

Actionability

The skill is almost entirely descriptive rather than instructive. There are no executable code examples, no concrete commands, no Terraform snippets, no specific configuration examples. The comparison tables are informational but don't tell Claude what to do. The migration strategy and patterns are high-level descriptions without specific implementation steps.

2 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The migration strategy provides a phased sequence (Assessment → Pilot → Migration → Optimization), but lacks validation checkpoints, specific verification steps, or feedback loops. For a skill involving potentially destructive migration operations, the absence of explicit validation steps is notable. The multi-cloud patterns are listed but not sequenced into actionable workflows.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

References to external files like 'references/service-comparison.md', 'references/multi-cloud-patterns.md', and 'resources/implementation-playbook.md' are present, but no bundle files exist to support them. The main file contains substantial inline content (comparison tables) that could be in reference files, while the referenced files that should contain detail don't exist. The structure is reasonable but the execution is incomplete.

3 / 5

Total

11

/

20

Passed

Description

36%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 identifies the domain (multi-cloud architecture) and names the three major providers, but it is too vague about what concrete actions the skill performs and completely lacks a 'when to use' clause. It reads more like a category label than an actionable skill description that would help Claude reliably select it from a large skill library.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms like 'cloud architecture', 'multi-cloud', 'cloud migration', 'choosing between AWS/Azure/GCP', 'cloud infrastructure design'.

Replace 'decision framework and patterns' with concrete actions such as 'compares cloud services across providers, recommends compute/storage/networking configurations, designs multi-cloud or hybrid architectures'.

Include common synonyms and related terms users might say, such as 'cloud deployment', 'serverless', 'IaC', 'cloud-native', 'infrastructure planning'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain (cloud architecture across AWS, Azure, GCP) but actions are minimal and generic — 'decision framework and patterns' and 'architecting applications' are vague and don't describe concrete actions like 'selects compute services', 'designs networking topologies', or 'compares pricing models'.

2 / 5

Completeness

Provides a vague 'what' (decision framework and patterns for architecting) but completely lacks a 'when' clause. There is no explicit trigger guidance telling Claude when to select this skill, which per the rubric should cap completeness at 3 maximum, and the weak 'what' brings it to 2.

2 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes relevant keywords like 'AWS', 'Azure', 'GCP', and 'architecting applications' which users might naturally mention. However, it misses common synonyms and natural phrases like 'cloud infrastructure', 'multi-cloud', 'cloud migration', 'serverless', 'IaC', 'cloud deployment', or 'cloud design'.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The mention of all three major cloud providers (AWS, Azure, GCP) together gives it some distinctiveness as a cross-cloud architecture skill, but 'architecting applications' is broad enough to overlap with individual cloud-specific skills, infrastructure-as-code skills, or general software architecture skills.

3 / 5

Total

10

/

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.