Name: slo-implementation
Rating: 51.2 (1 reviews)
Author: administrakt0r

slo-implementation

Framework for defining and implementing Service Level Indicators (SLIs), Service Level Objectives (SLOs), and error budgets.

Quality

57%

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/slo-implementation/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is slo-implementation in administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills

Quality

Content

61%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 — dense with executable PromQL and Prometheus/YAML configurations — but it over-inlines material that belongs in reference files and references bundle files that do not exist. It also lacks a checkpointed implementation workflow despite being framed as an implementation skill.

Suggestions

Create the referenced bundle files (references/slo-definitions.md, references/error-budget.md, assets/slo-template.md, resources/implementation-playbook.md) or remove the broken references; note the path inconsistency between 'references/' and 'resources/'.

Move the bulk recording rules, alerting rules, and review-cadence material into one-level-deep reference files, keeping SKILL.md as a lean overview with clear navigation.

Add an ordered, checkpointed implementation workflow (e.g. define SLIs -> set SLO targets -> calculate error budget -> deploy recording rules -> validate alerts) with explicit verification steps.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Largely example-driven rather than prose-heavy, but includes padding Claude does not need — the ASCII dashboard mockup, generic 'Best Practices' list, and SLO review cadences — so it is mostly efficient with some unnecessary material.	3 / 5
Actionability	Provides copy-paste-ready PromQL, Prometheus recording/alerting rules, YAML SLO definitions, and multi-window burn-rate alerts that cover the common implementation cases.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	No real sequenced implementation workflow with validation checkpoints; the 'Instructions' section is generic and the 'SLO Implementation' section jumps straight into recording rules without ordered, checkpointed steps.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	No references/ or assets/ bundle directories exist, yet the body cites four files (references/slo-definitions.md, references/error-budget.md, assets/slo-template.md, resources/implementation-playbook.md) that are absent, and bulk content (recording rules, alert rules, dashboard, review process) is inlined rather than split out.	2 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Description

53%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 clearly names the SLO domain and its core constructs but reads as a high-level definition rather than trigger-optimized guidance. It lacks an explicit 'when to use' clause and leans on specialist jargon over natural user phrasing.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when defining service reliability targets, setting SLOs, or implementing error budgets'.

Broaden trigger terms with natural variations users actually say: 'reliability targets', 'SLAs', 'service levels', 'burn rate'.

Make actions more concrete (e.g. 'define SLIs, set SLO targets, calculate error budgets, configure multi-window burn-rate alerts') instead of generic 'defining and implementing'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain (SLIs/SLOs/error budgets) with two generic actions ('defining and implementing'), but does not enumerate several distinct concrete operations, matching the anchor 'Names domain and 1-2 concrete actions'.	3 / 5
Completeness	Provides a clear 'what' but no 'Use when...' trigger guidance; per the rubric a missing explicit trigger clause caps completeness at 3.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Contains specialist terms ('SLIs', 'SLOs', 'error budgets') but leans on technical jargon and omits common natural variations like 'reliability targets', 'SLAs', or 'service levels'.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Occupies a fairly distinct SLO/reliability niche with minimal conflict risk, though adjacent monitoring/alerting skills could overlap, placing it just below the fully-distinct anchor.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Validation

87%

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 — 14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning
referenced_paths_exist	Referenced path issues: 5 missing	Warning

	Total	14 / 16 Passed

Repository: administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills
Path: plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills-claude/skills/slo-implementation/SKILL.md
Commit: 57c135b

Reviewed: 17 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.