tracking-service-reliability

Define and track SLAs, SLIs, and SLOs for service reliability including availability, latency, and error rates. Use when establishing reliability targets or monitoring service health. Trigger with phrases like "define SLOs", "track SLI metrics", or "calculate error budget".

Quality

52%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugins/performance/sla-sli-tracker/skills/tracking-service-reliability/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

20%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The content is mostly conceptual prose that restates SRE basics Claude already knows, with no executable guidance and no integration of the bundled script. Workflows are sequenced but lack validation checkpoints, and the bundle files are neither referenced nor navigable from the body.

Suggestions

Remove the conceptual restatement of SLI/SLO/SLA definitions and replace it with concrete, executable guidance — example Prometheus/SLO queries, an error-budget calculation formula, or invocations of scripts/generate_sla_report.py.

Add explicit validation/verification checkpoints into the Instructions workflow (e.g., 'verify the SLI definition YAML parses' before tracking) so the sequence has feedback loops.

Wire the body to the actual bundle: reference the real generate_sla_report.py and either implement or remove the missing calculate_error_budget.py and monitor_sli.py, with clear one-level-deep links from SKILL.md.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body re-explains concepts Claude already knows (what SLIs/SLOs/SLAs are) and pads with heavy restatement across Overview, How It Works, and Instructions sections, matching the 'explains concepts Claude knows; padded with unnecessary context' anchor.	1 / 3
Actionability	There is no executable code, no commands, and no concrete tool configuration; guidance is abstract ('Configure automated SLI data collection', 'Calculate error budgets based on SLOs') and the bundled generate_sla_report.py is never invoked or referenced, matching 'describes rather than instructs'.	1 / 3
Workflow Clarity	A numbered Instructions/How-It-Works sequence is present, but validation checkpoints and feedback loops are absent and the Error Handling section is vague bullets, fitting 'steps listed but validation gaps; checkpoints missing or implicit'.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	Sections are organized but the body is a monolithic prose wall with content that should be separate inline; the only path reference is a data file, and the existing bundle (scripts/references/assets) is not signaled from the body, with scripts/README listing scripts that do not exist.	2 / 3
	Total	6 / 12 Passed

Description

85%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

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 is specific, complete with an explicit 'Use when' trigger clause, and well-scoped to a distinct reliability niche. Its main weakness is trigger-term naturalism: the example phrases lean toward SRE specialist jargon rather than the broad terms a general user would say.

Suggestions

Broaden trigger terms beyond SRE jargon, e.g. add natural variations like 'set uptime targets', 'monitor service health', or 'how reliable is my service'.

Consider including a layperson-friendly trigger alongside the specialist ones to widen the audience who would naturally invoke the skill.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names multiple concrete actions ('Define and track SLAs, SLIs, and SLOs') across three artifact types and three metric dimensions ('availability, latency, and error rates'), matching the multi-action anchor.	3 / 3
Completeness	Explicitly answers what ('Define and track SLAs, SLIs, and SLOs...') and when ('Use when establishing reliability targets or monitoring service health'), with an explicit 'Use when' clause present.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Provides explicit triggers ('define SLOs', 'track SLI metrics', 'calculate error budget') but these skew toward SRE jargon and miss common layperson variations, fitting 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations.'	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Occupies a clear SLO/SLI/SLA reliability niche with distinct, domain-specific triggers, making conflict with unrelated skills unlikely.	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 Passed

Validation

87%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 14 / 16 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	14 / 16 Passed

Repository: jeremylongshore/claude-code-plugins-plus-skills
Path: plugins/performance/sla-sli-tracker/skills/tracking-service-reliability/SKILL.md
Commit: bddba3c

Reviewed: about 23 hours ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.