detecting-database-deadlocks
Process use when you need to work with deadlock detection. This skill provides deadlock detection and resolution with comprehensive guidance and automation. Trigger with phrases like "detect deadlocks", "resolve deadlocks", or "prevent deadlocks".
54
45%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./plugins/database/database-deadlock-detector/skills/detecting-database-deadlocks/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
40%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 identifies a clear domain (deadlock detection/resolution) and includes explicit trigger phrases, which is positive. However, it suffers from vague capability descriptions, awkward grammar in the opening sentence, and lacks specific concrete actions that would help Claude understand exactly what this skill does. The phrase 'comprehensive guidance and automation' is empty fluff that adds no discriminative value.
Suggestions
Replace vague language like 'comprehensive guidance and automation' with specific concrete actions, e.g., 'Analyzes thread dumps to identify circular wait conditions, detects lock ordering violations, and suggests resolution strategies such as lock hierarchy enforcement or timeout-based recovery.'
Expand trigger terms to include common variations like 'thread lock', 'circular wait', 'lock contention', 'concurrency issue', 'thread dump', or 'resource contention'.
Fix the awkward opening sentence 'Process use when you need to work with deadlock detection' — rewrite in third person, e.g., 'Detects and resolves deadlocks in concurrent systems.'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description says 'deadlock detection and resolution with comprehensive guidance and automation' but never lists concrete actions. 'Comprehensive guidance and automation' is vague fluff without specifying what it actually does (e.g., analyze thread dumps, identify circular dependencies, suggest lock ordering). | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | It has a weak 'what' (deadlock detection and resolution) and does include trigger phrases serving as a 'when' clause. However, the 'what' is too vague to be truly useful, and the opening sentence 'Process use when you need to work with deadlock detection' is grammatically awkward and unclear. | 2 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | It includes some relevant trigger phrases like 'detect deadlocks', 'resolve deadlocks', and 'prevent deadlocks', which are natural terms users might say. However, it misses common variations like 'thread lock', 'circular wait', 'lock contention', 'thread dump analysis', or 'concurrency issues'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Deadlock detection is a fairly specific niche, which helps distinctiveness. However, the vague 'comprehensive guidance and automation' language could overlap with general debugging or concurrency skills, and the description doesn't clearly delineate its boundaries. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
50%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a moderately well-structured skill that covers deadlock detection comprehensively across multiple databases. Its main weaknesses are: inline SQL queries that should be in code blocks for actionability, lack of validation/feedback loops in the workflow, verbose narrative explanations where concise patterns would suffice, and missing concrete implementation code for retry logic and monitoring scripts. The error handling table and examples section add genuine value.
Suggestions
Format all SQL queries and commands as proper fenced code blocks with language hints (```sql, ```bash) to improve copy-paste actionability
Add a concrete retry logic code example (Python or language-agnostic pseudocode with actual error code handling) for step 7, and a monitoring script skeleton for step 8
Insert explicit validation checkpoints after fix implementation—e.g., 'Re-run the lock wait query from step 1 to confirm the deadlock pattern no longer occurs under load testing'
Either remove MongoDB from the overview or add MongoDB-specific guidance; the current mention without follow-through is misleading
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is reasonably efficient but includes some explanatory text that Claude would already know (e.g., explaining what gap locks are, what foreign key lock escalation means). The examples section is valuable but somewhat verbose in narrative form. The instructions could be tightened—for instance, the SQL queries in step 1 could be formatted as code blocks rather than inline text. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides specific SQL queries and concrete patterns, but the queries are embedded inline rather than in proper code blocks, reducing copy-paste readability. Steps 3-6 and 8-10 are more descriptive than executable—they describe what to do conceptually rather than providing concrete commands or scripts. The retry logic in step 7 mentions error codes but doesn't provide actual implementation code. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 10-step sequence is logically ordered from detection through prevention and monitoring, which is good. However, there are no explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops—for example, after implementing fixes in step 6, there's no step to verify the deadlock is resolved. Steps 8-10 feel like separate concerns rather than part of a cohesive workflow with clear decision points. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is organized into clear sections (Overview, Prerequisites, Instructions, Output, Error Handling, Examples, Resources), which is good structure. However, it's a monolithic document with no bundle files to offload detailed content. The database-specific guidance (PostgreSQL vs MySQL vs MongoDB—MongoDB is mentioned in overview but never addressed) could be split into separate reference files for each database. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 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.