azure-messaging
Troubleshoot and resolve issues with Azure Messaging SDKs for Event Hubs and Service Bus. Covers connection failures, authentication errors, message processing issues, and SDK configuration problems. USE FOR: event hub SDK error, service bus SDK issue, messaging connection failure, AMQP error, event processor host issue, message lock lost, send timeout, receiver disconnected, SDK troubleshooting, azure messaging SDK, event hub consumer, service bus queue issue, topic subscription error, enable logging event hub, service bus logging, eventhub python, servicebus java, eventhub javascript, servicebus dotnet, event hub checkpoint, event hub not receiving messages, service bus dead letter DO NOT USE FOR: creating Event Hub or Service Bus resources (use azure-prepare), cost analysis (use azure-cost-optimization)
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:microsoft/github-copilot-for-azure --skill azure-messaging91
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillEvaluation — 99%
↑ 1.67xAgent success when using this skill
Validation for skill structure
Discovery
100%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 an excellent skill description that hits all the key criteria. It provides specific troubleshooting capabilities, extensive natural trigger terms covering multiple languages and common error scenarios, explicit 'USE FOR' and 'DO NOT USE FOR' clauses, and clear boundaries to prevent conflicts with related skills.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'connection failures, authentication errors, message processing issues, and SDK configuration problems' - these are concrete troubleshooting scenarios rather than vague language. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what ('Troubleshoot and resolve issues with Azure Messaging SDKs') and when (explicit 'USE FOR:' clause with extensive trigger terms, plus 'DO NOT USE FOR:' to prevent misuse). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural terms users would say including SDK-specific terms ('AMQP error', 'message lock lost', 'send timeout'), language-specific variants ('eventhub python', 'servicebus java', 'servicebus dotnet'), and common issue phrases ('not receiving messages', 'dead letter'). | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Clear niche focused specifically on Azure Messaging SDK troubleshooting with explicit boundaries via 'DO NOT USE FOR' clause that redirects resource creation and cost analysis to other skills, minimizing conflict risk. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
72%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-organized and concise, with excellent progressive disclosure through clear references to language-specific SDK guides. However, it lacks concrete executable examples (KQL queries, code snippets for enabling logging, specific error patterns) that would make the troubleshooting guidance immediately actionable rather than procedural.
Suggestions
Add a concrete KQL query example for querying Event Hubs or Service Bus diagnostic logs using mcp_azure_mcp_monitor
Include at least one specific error message pattern with its corresponding fix (e.g., 'MessageLockLostException' -> increase lock duration or process faster)
Add validation checkpoints to the diagnosis workflow (e.g., 'If resource health shows degraded, check Azure Status page before proceeding')
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is lean and efficient, using tables for quick reference and avoiding unnecessary explanations. Every section serves a clear purpose without padding or explaining concepts Claude already knows. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | The diagnosis workflow provides clear steps, but lacks concrete executable code examples. The guidance is procedural but abstract - no actual KQL queries, connection string formats, or specific commands to run. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 6-step diagnosis workflow is clearly sequenced, but lacks explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops. No guidance on what to do if resource health check fails or if documentation search yields no results. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Excellent structure with clear overview and well-signaled one-level-deep references to SDK-specific guides and service troubleshooting. Navigation is easy with organized links by language and service. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%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.
- 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.