senior-fullstack
Fullstack development toolkit with project scaffolding for Next.js, FastAPI, MERN, and Django stacks, code quality analysis with security and complexity scoring, and stack selection guidance. Use when the user asks to "scaffold a new project", "create a Next.js app", "set up FastAPI with React", "analyze code quality", "audit my codebase", "what stack should I use", "generate project boilerplate", or mentions fullstack development, project setup, or tech stack comparison.
94
88%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
98%
1.58xAverage score across 6 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Quality
Discovery
92%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is a strong description that clearly articulates specific capabilities across three domains (scaffolding, code analysis, stack guidance) and provides extensive trigger phrases in an explicit 'Use when...' clause. The main weakness is that the scope is broad enough—spanning project creation, code auditing, and tech stack advice—that it could overlap with more specialized skills in any of those individual areas.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: project scaffolding for named stacks (Next.js, FastAPI, MERN, Django), code quality analysis with security and complexity scoring, and stack selection guidance. These are clearly defined capabilities. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (scaffolding, code quality analysis, stack selection guidance) and 'when' with an explicit 'Use when...' clause containing numerous trigger phrases and scenarios. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural user phrases: 'scaffold a new project', 'create a Next.js app', 'set up FastAPI with React', 'analyze code quality', 'audit my codebase', 'what stack should I use', 'generate project boilerplate', plus broader terms like 'fullstack development', 'project setup', 'tech stack comparison'. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | While the scaffolding and stack selection aspects are fairly distinct, 'code quality analysis' and 'audit my codebase' could overlap with dedicated linting, security scanning, or code review skills. The 'fullstack development' trigger is also broad enough to potentially conflict with general coding skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
85%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-structured fullstack development skill with strong actionability and workflow clarity, featuring executable commands, validation checkpoints, and good progressive disclosure to reference files. Its main weakness is moderate verbosity—the trigger phrases section is unnecessary, parameter tables could be condensed, and the sample output block adds bulk without proportional value. Overall it's a solid skill that could benefit from trimming.
Suggestions
Remove the 'Trigger Phrases' section entirely—this duplicates the frontmatter description and wastes tokens on information Claude doesn't need in-context.
Condense the parameter tables into inline descriptions (e.g., 'Args: template, project_name, --output DIR, --json, --list-templates') since the CLI usage examples already demonstrate the parameters clearly.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill includes some unnecessary content like the 'Trigger Phrases' section (which duplicates frontmatter intent), verbose parameter tables for straightforward CLI tools, and the sample output block. The reference guide section is appropriately brief, but overall the document could be tightened—particularly the tool documentation which reads more like a man page than a skill instruction. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable bash commands for every tool and workflow, with concrete examples including specific template names, flags, and file paths. The workflows give copy-paste ready command sequences, and the quick reference tables provide specific, actionable recommendations. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | All three workflows are clearly sequenced with numbered steps. Workflow 1 includes a verification step (confirm package.json exists) and a quality check before proceeding. Workflow 2 explicitly includes a re-run validation step after fixing P0 issues, creating a proper feedback loop. Workflow 3 is a simple decision tree that's unambiguous. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill provides a clear table of contents, keeps the main file as an overview with tool usage and workflows, and appropriately delegates detailed content to one-level-deep reference files (architecture_patterns.md, development_workflows.md, tech_stack_guide.md) with clear descriptions of what each contains. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- Repository
- alirezarezvani/claude-skills
- Commit
967fe01
- 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.