CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

terraform-skill

Use when writing, reviewing, or debugging Terraform/OpenTofu modules, tests, CI, scans, or state ops - diagnoses failure mode (identity churn, secrets, blast radius, CI drift, state corruption) with version-aware guards.

Quality

86%

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

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

78%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.

A well-engineered overview: diagnose-first workflow with a routing table, version-aware guard tables, executable commands and HCL, and exemplary progressive disclosure into 8 verified reference files. Remaining gaps are minor: implicit validation-failure/retry loops in the workflow, a few directive-only statements, and small pockets of redundancy (duplicate reference pointers, some basics-level summary tables).

Suggestions

Make the workflow's error-recovery loop explicit — add a step after 'Validate before finalizing' stating what to do on failure (read the error, fix, re-run validation) to reach anchor 5 on workflow clarity.

Trim redundancy: the State Management section links 'Choosing a Remote Backend' twice in one passage, and the Naming Conventions / Count vs For_Each quick tables restate knowledge Claude already has — compress these to one-line pointers into the references.

Give executable forms for the directive-only guidance, e.g., an example policy-check command line and how to invoke the Terraform MCP schema validation, so all validation steps are copy-paste ready.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Largely lean and table-driven, focused on non-obvious, version-sensitive knowledge (e.g., "Marking a variable sensitive = true masks display only — the value still lives in state", "use_lockfile" on 1.10+, set-type blocks not indexable with [0]) rather than basics. Minor trimmable fat remains: duplicate pointers to the same reference within one section ("Choosing a Remote Backend" linked twice), and sections like Naming Conventions and the count/for_each quick table restate knowledge Claude largely has. Fits anchor 4 (efficient, minor over-explanation) rather than 3, since the padding is sparse relative to the dense signal.

4 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, executable artifacts are present: `trivy config .` / `checkov -d .` commands, a copy-paste-ready S3 backend HCL block, exact pin syntax (`required_version = "~> 1.9"`), and named validation commands (`fmt -check`, `validate`, `plan -out`). Some guidance remains directive rather than executable (e.g., "run policy/security stage on every path to apply", "Terraform MCP" schema validation without a command), which keeps it at anchor 4 (mostly executable, minor gaps) rather than 5.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear 7-step workflow with explicit validation ("Validate before finalizing", "run validation commands tailored to risk tier") and strong destructive-operation checkpoints ("Never run terraform destroy ... without first running terraform plan -destroy", "Never use -auto-approve on destroy", get explicit confirmation) plus the Response Contract mandating a validation plan and rollback notes. The error-recovery feedback loop (what to do when validation fails: fix and re-validate) is only implicit, which keeps it below anchor 5.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Model progressive disclosure: essentials inline with depth deferred to 8 real one-level-deep reference files, all verified to exist with the deep-linked anchors (e.g., state-management.md#safe-destroy-protocol, code-patterns.md#count-vs-for_each-deep-dive) resolving to actual headings. Explicit "Load only the matching reference file(s)" instruction, a failure-mode routing table mapping symptoms to references, and a Reference Files index section make navigation easy — a clear anchor 5.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

87%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.

A strong description: explicit use-when triggers, a concrete diagnostic framing with named failure modes, and a clearly demarcated Terraform/OpenTofu niche in third-person voice. Its only weaknesses are a handful of missing natural trigger terms (HCL, .tf, plan/apply) and slightly generic top-level action verbs.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names several concrete capability areas ("modules, tests, CI, scans, or state ops") and a concrete diagnostic scope ("identity churn, secrets, blast radius, CI drift, state corruption") with "version-aware guards", but the primary verbs (writing, reviewing, debugging) are generic and coverage gaps exist (e.g., module architecture, migration). Fits anchor 4 (several specific actions, minor gaps) rather than 5, whose examples enumerate a comprehensive list of distinct concrete actions.

4 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both questions: the "Use when writing, reviewing, or debugging Terraform/OpenTofu modules, tests, CI, scans, or state ops" clause is a concrete trigger phrase, and "diagnoses failure mode (...) with version-aware guards" clearly states what it does. Third-person voice throughout. Matches anchor 5; it is clearly above anchor 4, whose 'when' is weaker or less specific.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Strong natural keywords users would actually say: "Terraform", "OpenTofu", "modules", "tests", "CI", "state ops". Missing a few common variations and file-level terms (HCL, .tf, tfvars, plan/apply, Atlantis), so it sits between anchor 4 (good coverage, a few natural terms missing) and 5 (comprehensive synonyms/extensions), and is noticeably above the midpoint.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Terraform/OpenTofu" names a clear niche with distinct, product-specific triggers; no other skill type would plausibly hijack these triggers. Minimal conflict risk, matching anchor 5.

5 / 5

Total

18

/

20

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

antonbabenko/terraform-skill

Path

skills/terraform-skill/SKILL.md

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.