CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

oma-architecture

Evaluate system boundaries and architectural tradeoffs. Use for architecture decisions, design reviews, and ADRs.

64

Quality

75%

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/oma-architecture/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

67%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-structured, multi-method architecture skill with clear workflow sequencing and progressive disclosure via external resource files. Its main weakness is actionability: the analytical methodology is described abstractly and relies on external files for executable detail.

Suggestions

Inline one or two concrete method snippets (e.g., a minimal ATAM scenario table or a design-twice comparison template) so the skill is actionable without opening resources/methodology-selection.md.

Consolidate file references into the single References section and remove duplicate path listings from Dependencies and Expected outputs to tighten token use.

Add a concrete validation command or checklist the agent runs during the VERIFY scene, rather than only describing validation abstractly.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is dense, structured reference material (tables, lists, modes) with no concept-explanation fluff, though the Intent signature, When to use, Scenes, and Method Selection Summary sections restate the same workflow with minor redundancy that could be trimmed.

4 / 5

Actionability

Provides some concrete executable guidance (bash commands like 'ls .agents/results/architecture/' and 'rg --files', named method modes, a YAML outputs block), but the core analytical steps remain abstract and defer actual method detail to external resources/*.md files.

3 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Clear sequenced process via Entry, Scenes (PREPARE/ACQUIRE/REASON/VERIFY/FINALIZE), Transitions, and Failure-and-recovery with a VERIFY checkpoint and guardrail checklist, though validation is described at a high level rather than as concrete verification commands.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Good structure with a dedicated References section and one-level-deep pointers to resources/*.md and _shared/core/*.md, though references are scattered across Dependencies, Expected outputs, and References rather than consolidated into a single navigable map; no bundle files are present to verify the referenced paths resolve.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

83%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 concise, well-formed description that clearly states capability and trigger conditions in third person with concrete natural-language triggers. It distinguishes the architecture niche well with only minor overlap risk.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain and several specific actions/outputs ('Evaluate system boundaries and architectural tradeoffs', 'architecture decisions, design reviews, and ADRs'), with only minor coverage gaps compared to a fully comprehensive action list.

4 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both what ('Evaluate system boundaries and architectural tradeoffs') and when ('Use for architecture decisions, design reviews, and ADRs') with concrete trigger phrases in third-person voice.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural terms users would say ('architecture decisions', 'design reviews', 'ADRs', 'system boundaries') with good coverage, though a few common synonyms or phrasings are missing.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Targets a clear architecture niche with distinct triggers, but 'design reviews' creates minor overlap risk with general design or code-review skills.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

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
first-fluke/oh-my-agent
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.