microservices-architect
Designs distributed system architectures, decomposes monoliths into bounded-context services, recommends communication patterns, and produces service boundary diagrams and resilience strategies. Use when designing distributed systems, decomposing monoliths, or implementing microservices patterns — including service boundaries, DDD, saga patterns, event sourcing, CQRS, service mesh, or distributed tracing.
72
88%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
—
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Quality
Discovery
100%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 an excellent skill description that hits all the marks. It provides specific concrete actions, comprehensive trigger terms covering the distributed systems domain, an explicit 'Use when...' clause, and enough domain-specific terminology to clearly distinguish it from other architecture or development skills.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'designs distributed system architectures', 'decomposes monoliths into bounded-context services', 'recommends communication patterns', 'produces service boundary diagrams and resilience strategies'. These are all concrete, well-defined capabilities. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (designs architectures, decomposes monoliths, recommends patterns, produces diagrams) and 'when' with an explicit 'Use when...' clause listing specific trigger scenarios and patterns. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural terms users would say: 'distributed systems', 'monoliths', 'microservices', 'service boundaries', 'DDD', 'saga patterns', 'event sourcing', 'CQRS', 'service mesh', 'distributed tracing'. These are all terms a developer would naturally use when seeking this kind of help. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Occupies a clear niche around distributed systems and microservices architecture. The specific domain terms like 'saga patterns', 'CQRS', 'event sourcing', and 'bounded-context services' make it highly distinguishable from general architecture or coding skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
77%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 microservices architecture skill with strong actionability through executable code examples and a clear multi-step workflow with validation checkpoints. Its main weaknesses are the missing bundle reference files that the progressive disclosure table points to, and some token inefficiency from redundant knowledge listings and MUST/MUST NOT items that restate workflow guidance. The code examples are a particular strength, covering diverse patterns across multiple languages.
Suggestions
Remove or significantly trim the 'Knowledge Reference' keyword list at the bottom — Claude already knows these concepts and the list wastes tokens.
Provide the referenced bundle files (references/decomposition.md, references/communication.md, etc.) to fulfill the progressive disclosure promises made in the reference table.
Consolidate the MUST/MUST NOT constraints with the workflow validation checkpoints to reduce redundancy — many constraints simply restate what the workflow already covers.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is reasonably efficient but includes some unnecessary content. The 'Knowledge Reference' section at the bottom is a keyword dump that Claude already knows. The MUST/MUST NOT lists partially restate what's already covered in the workflow. The code examples are well-chosen but the overall document could be tightened. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides fully executable code examples across multiple languages (Node.js, Python, TypeScript, Kubernetes YAML) covering key patterns like circuit breakers, saga orchestration, correlation IDs, and health probes. Each example is copy-paste ready with clear context for when to use it. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 6-step core workflow is clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints at each step. Each checkpoint defines concrete, verifiable criteria (e.g., 'No shared database schema exists between services'). The saga example includes a built-in compensation/rollback pattern, demonstrating error recovery. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The reference table with 'Load When' guidance is well-structured and clearly signaled, but no bundle files were provided, meaning all referenced files (references/decomposition.md, references/communication.md, etc.) are missing. The inline content is substantial but appropriately scoped; however, the missing references undermine the progressive disclosure strategy. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 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
- jeffallan/claude-skills
- Commit
e8be415
- 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.