backend-development-feature-development
Orchestrate end-to-end backend feature development from requirements to deployment. Use when coordinating multi-phase feature delivery across teams and services.
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:duclm1x1/Dive-Ai --skill backend-development-feature-development72
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillValidation for skill structure
Discovery
67%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 has good structural completeness with explicit 'what' and 'when' clauses, but suffers from vague action verbs ('orchestrate', 'coordinating') rather than concrete capabilities. The trigger terms are adequate but could be expanded to include more natural user language around backend development workflows.
Suggestions
Replace vague verbs with specific actions: e.g., 'Design APIs, coordinate database schema changes, manage service dependencies, and track deployment pipelines'
Add more natural trigger terms users would say: 'API development', 'microservices', 'sprint delivery', 'release coordination', 'cross-team features'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain ('backend feature development') and mentions phases ('requirements to deployment'), but lacks concrete actions. 'Orchestrate' and 'coordinating' are somewhat vague compared to specific actions like 'create API endpoints, write database migrations, configure CI/CD pipelines'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Explicitly answers both what ('Orchestrate end-to-end backend feature development from requirements to deployment') and when ('Use when coordinating multi-phase feature delivery across teams and services') with a clear 'Use when...' clause. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes some relevant terms ('backend', 'feature development', 'deployment', 'requirements'), but misses common variations users might say like 'API', 'microservices', 'sprint planning', 'feature implementation', or 'release management'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Somewhat specific to backend orchestration, but 'feature development' and 'deployment' could overlap with general coding skills, DevOps skills, or project management skills. The 'multi-phase' and 'across teams' qualifiers help but aren't strongly distinctive. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
62%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill provides a comprehensive orchestration framework for feature development with excellent workflow structure and clear phase sequencing. However, it suffers from verbosity (especially the extended thinking block and repetitive prompt templates) and lacks concrete executable examples. The content would benefit from being split across multiple files and including more actionable code snippets or schema definitions.
Suggestions
Remove the extended thinking block and condense the introductory context - Claude doesn't need this meta-explanation
Add concrete example outputs for at least one phase (e.g., a sample requirements document structure or API contract schema) to improve actionability
Split detailed phase instructions into a separate PHASES.md file, keeping SKILL.md as a concise overview with quick-start guidance
Replace verbose prompt templates with more concise instruction patterns, or move them to a PROMPTS.md reference file
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is moderately efficient but includes some unnecessary verbosity, particularly the extended thinking block and repetitive prompt templates. The configuration options and phase descriptions could be more condensed. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides structured guidance with specific subagent types and prompts, but lacks concrete executable code examples. The prompts are templates rather than copy-paste ready commands, and expected outputs are described abstractly rather than with concrete schemas or examples. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Excellent multi-phase workflow with clear sequencing across 12 numbered steps organized into 4 phases. Includes explicit validation checkpoints (security validation, testing phases), rollback strategy with specific timeframes, and clear dependencies between phases. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is well-organized with clear sections and phases, but everything is inline in a single monolithic document. Complex configuration options, detailed phase instructions, and rollback strategies could be split into separate reference files for better navigation. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 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.
- 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.