architecture-interview

Analyze, review, and plan architecture alternatives through a structured interview. Use when the user needs tradeoffs surfaced before implementation or a Linear decision note instead of an ADR.

Quality

79%

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 ./Skills/product-strategy/architecture-interview/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

71%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.

The body is a well-structured, mostly lean instruction-only skill with concrete workflow guidance, but it suffers from duplicated sections and references to bundle paths that do not exist, which hurt conciseness and progressive disclosure.

Suggestions

Remove the duplicate 'Failure Mode' and 'Gotchas' sections and merge the redundant 'Execution Boundaries' bullet clusters to tighten the body.

Either create the referenced Infrastructure/references/*.md and deferred-skill-context/ files in the bundle or drop those references so all cited paths resolve.

Add a short copy-paste-ready Linear decision note template (or a pointer to one in references/) to lift actionability and workflow clarity.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The prose is lean and assumes Claude's competence, but duplicate 'Failure Mode' and 'Gotchas' sections and near-duplicate 'Execution Boundaries' bullet clusters are padding that could be trimmed, keeping it just below a 5.	4 / 5
Actionability	Concrete, specific guidance for an instruction-only skill ('Compare 2-4 viable alternatives', 'Name the sacrifice and the non-obvious consequence', 'one-question-at-a-time'), but no copy-paste-ready Linear decision note template or schema example is shown, leaving a minor gap.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear 6-step sequenced workflow with a separate validation section ('Fail fast: stop at the first failed gate'), though validation checkpoints are not integrated as explicit per-step feedback loops, which keeps it just short of 5.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Section headers and real bundle files (references/contract.yaml, evals.yaml, task-profile.json) provide structure, but the body also references non-existent paths (Infrastructure/references/software-literature-*.md, deferred-skill-context/...) and duplicates two section blocks, leaving organization unresolved.	3 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Description

87%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.

The description is strong: it states concrete capabilities, gives an explicit 'Use when' trigger clause with natural keywords, and defines a clear niche. Minor room remains only in synonym/variation coverage for trigger terms.

Suggestions

Add a few natural trigger synonyms (e.g., 'architecture review', 'design tradeoff', 'decision record') to broaden the keyword coverage toward a 5 on trigger term quality.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the architecture domain and several concrete actions ('Analyze, review, and plan architecture alternatives', 'structured interview', 'tradeoffs surfaced', 'Linear decision note instead of an ADR'), with only minor gaps in coverage rather than the fully distinct concrete operations of a 5.	4 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly answers both what ('Analyze, review, and plan architecture alternatives through a structured interview') and when ('Use when the user needs tradeoffs surfaced before implementation or a Linear decision note instead of an ADR') with concrete trigger phrases.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes natural user-facing terms ('architecture alternatives', 'tradeoffs', 'Linear decision note', 'ADR', 'before implementation') with good coverage, missing only some synonym variations that would push it to 5.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The Linear-decision-note-vs-ADR framing and 'structured interview' niche carve a distinct trigger space with minimal overlap risk against other skills.	5 / 5
	Total	18 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: jscraik/Agent-Skills
Path: Skills/product-strategy/architecture-interview/SKILL.md
Commit: f1f2f21

Reviewed: 1 day 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.