azure-diagnostics

Debug Azure production issues on Azure using AppLens, Azure Monitor, resource health, and safe triage. WHEN: debug production issues, troubleshoot app service, app service high CPU, app service deployment failure, troubleshoot container apps, troubleshoot functions, troubleshoot AKS, kubectl cannot connect, kube-system/CoreDNS failures, pod pending, crashloop, node not ready, upgrade failures, analyze logs, KQL, insights, image pull failures, cold start issues, health probe failures, resource health, root cause of errors, troubleshoot event hubs, troubleshoot service bus, messaging SDK error, AMQP connection failure, message lock lost, service bus dead letter.

Quality

73%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

—

No eval scenarios have been run

Securityby

Advisory

Suggest reviewing before use

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.github/plugins/azure-skills/skills/azure-diagnostics/SKILL.md

Quality

Discovery

89%

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 a strong skill description with excellent trigger term coverage and completeness. The explicit WHEN clause with extensive, specific trigger scenarios makes it highly effective for skill selection. The main weakness is that the 'what it does' portion could be more specific about concrete actions beyond 'debug' and 'safe triage'.

Suggestions

Expand the initial capability statement to list more concrete actions, e.g., 'Diagnoses root causes, queries logs with KQL, inspects resource health, analyzes pod states, and recommends remediation steps for Azure production issues.'

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names the domain (Azure production issues) and mentions specific tools (AppLens, Azure Monitor, resource health), but the 'what it does' is limited to 'debug' and 'safe triage' — it doesn't list multiple concrete actions like 'analyze logs, query metrics, check resource health status, inspect pod states'.	2 / 3
Completeness	The description explicitly answers both 'what' (debug Azure production issues using specific tools) and 'when' (with an explicit 'WHEN:' clause listing extensive trigger scenarios). The 'WHEN' section is thorough and clearly delineated.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Excellent coverage of natural trigger terms users would actually say: 'high CPU', 'deployment failure', 'crashloop', 'pod pending', 'node not ready', 'cold start issues', 'dead letter', 'AMQP connection failure', 'KQL', 'kubectl cannot connect', etc. These are highly specific and match real user language.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Highly distinctive — the combination of Azure-specific services (App Service, Container Apps, Functions, AKS, Event Hubs, Service Bus) with specific tools (AppLens, Azure Monitor, KQL) and very specific failure modes (CrashLoop, CoreDNS failures, AMQP connection failure, message lock lost) creates a clear niche unlikely to conflict with other skills.	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 Passed

Implementation

57%

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

This skill is well-structured as a routing/overview document with good progressive disclosure to service-specific guides. However, it suffers from unnecessary verbosity (the mandatory compliance banner, redundant trigger lists, generic diagnosis flow) and the actionable content is somewhat incomplete — MCP tool examples use unclear pseudo-syntax and CLI commands rely on unexplained placeholders. The workflow lacks validation checkpoints and error recovery paths that would be important for production debugging.

Suggestions

Remove the 'AUTHORITATIVE GUIDANCE' banner and the verbose triggers section — these waste tokens without adding value for Claude.

Replace the generic 5-step 'Quick Diagnosis Flow' with a concrete decision tree that includes validation checkpoints (e.g., 'If resource health returns degraded → check activity log → if deployment-related → route to deployment guide').

Make MCP tool examples more actionable by showing a complete, realistic invocation with a note on how to obtain required parameters like resourceId and workspaceId.

Add error recovery guidance: what to do when AppLens is unavailable, when CLI commands fail, or when logs return no results.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The triggers section is overly verbose, essentially restating the YAML description. The 'AUTHORITATIVE GUIDANCE — MANDATORY COMPLIANCE' banner is unnecessary filler. The quick diagnosis flow is generic knowledge Claude already possesses. However, the reference table and command sections are reasonably efficient.	2 / 3
Actionability	Provides some concrete CLI commands and MCP tool invocation patterns, but many are incomplete (placeholder values without guidance on how to obtain them). The MCP tool examples use a pseudo-syntax that isn't clearly executable. The quick diagnosis flow is abstract rather than actionable.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	The quick diagnosis flow provides a sequence but lacks validation checkpoints and feedback loops. There's no explicit 'if this fails, do that' error recovery guidance. The routing section helps with triage but the actual diagnostic workflow is shallow — it mostly defers to reference files without providing a clear decision tree with verification steps.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	Excellent structure with a clear overview, a well-organized routing table pointing to service-specific guides, and a references section at the bottom. All references appear to be one level deep and clearly signaled with descriptive labels. The content is appropriately split between overview and detailed sub-documents.	3 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 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 — 11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: microsoft/azure-skills
Commit: d02fd24

Reviewed: 4 days 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.