circuit-breaker-setup
Circuit Breaker Setup - Auto-activating skill for API Integration. Triggers on: circuit breaker setup, circuit breaker setup Part of the API Integration skill category.
36
3%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
100%
1.02xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./planned-skills/generated/16-api-integration/circuit-breaker-setup/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
7%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 description is extremely thin and auto-generated, providing almost no useful information beyond the skill's name. It lacks concrete actions, meaningful trigger terms, and explicit guidance on when Claude should select this skill. It would be nearly indistinguishable from other API-related skills in a large skill library.
Suggestions
Add specific concrete actions the skill performs, e.g., 'Implements circuit breaker patterns for API calls, configures failure thresholds, defines fallback responses, and manages open/half-open/closed states.'
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about handling API failures gracefully, implementing retry logic, fault tolerance patterns, service resilience, or preventing cascading failures.'
Remove the duplicate trigger term ('circuit breaker setup' is listed twice) and expand with natural variations users might say, such as 'API timeout handling', 'failure recovery', 'resilience pattern', or 'service degradation protection'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description only names the concept 'Circuit Breaker Setup' without describing any concrete actions. There are no specific capabilities listed such as configuring thresholds, handling failures, implementing retry logic, or monitoring states. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The description fails to answer 'what does this do' beyond the name itself, and the 'when' guidance is essentially just restating the skill name as a trigger. There is no explicit 'Use when...' clause with meaningful context. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | The trigger terms are just 'circuit breaker setup' repeated twice. It lacks natural variations users might say like 'fault tolerance', 'retry pattern', 'API failure handling', 'resilience pattern', or 'service degradation'. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | While 'circuit breaker' is a somewhat specific pattern, the description is so vague that it could overlap with general API integration, error handling, or resilience pattern skills. The mention of 'API Integration skill category' adds slight context but doesn't clearly carve out a niche. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 5 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
0%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is an empty shell with no actionable content whatsoever. It contains only meta-descriptions of what it claims to do (e.g., 'provides step-by-step guidance,' 'generates production-ready code') without any actual guidance, code, patterns, or implementation details for circuit breakers. It fails on every dimension of the rubric.
Suggestions
Add a concrete, executable circuit breaker implementation example (e.g., a Python class with states: closed, open, half-open, failure thresholds, and timeout logic).
Include a clear multi-step workflow for integrating a circuit breaker into an API client, with validation steps (e.g., testing failure scenarios, verifying state transitions).
Remove all meta-description sections ('Purpose,' 'When to Use,' 'Example Triggers,' 'Capabilities') and replace them with actual technical content: configuration parameters, code snippets, and concrete patterns.
Add references to specific libraries or frameworks (e.g., pybreaker, resilience4j, Polly) with copy-paste-ready integration examples.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is padded with generic filler that tells Claude nothing it doesn't already know. Phrases like 'Provides step-by-step guidance,' 'Follows industry best practices,' and 'Generates production-ready code' are vacuous claims with zero informational content. The entire file could be replaced by a single concrete code example. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | There is no concrete code, no specific commands, no executable examples, and no actual instructions for implementing a circuit breaker. The content only describes what the skill supposedly does without showing how to do anything. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | There are no steps, no sequence, no validation checkpoints, and no workflow of any kind. The skill claims to provide 'step-by-step guidance' but contains none. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | There is no meaningful content to organize, no references to supporting files, and no navigation structure. The sections are just boilerplate headers with no substantive content beneath them. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Validation
81%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 9 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
allowed_tools_field | 'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s) | Warning |
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 9 / 11 Passed | |
- Commit
3a2d27d
- 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.