CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

architectural-decisions

Use when a task asks why code is built a certain way, proposes architectural changes, compares implementation approaches, or mentions decision markers such as WHY, DECISION, TRADEOFF, or ADR in a Repowise-indexed repository.

70

Quality

86%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

93%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.

A tight, highly actionable skill body that leads with concrete call signatures and organizes guidance by triggering scenario. The only soft spot is a couple of single-call sections that lack an explicit verify/recover step, though the skill is non-destructive so the workflow cap does not apply.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence — no padding, no explaining what an ADR or centrality is — and every line (the four get_why modes, the source list, the CLI commands) earns its place.

5 / 5

Actionability

It gives copy-paste-ready, concrete calls for every common case — get_why(query=...), targets=[...], get_why(), repowise decision health/confirm/add, repowise why — covering the main cases with executable syntax.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The 'When about to make an architectural change' section is a clear 3-step sequence with an explicit checkpoint ('present them to the user before proceeding'), but other sections rely on a single call without an explicit verify/feedback step, leaving minor checkpoint gaps relative to the 5 anchor.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist and none are needed; the body is well under 50 lines and cleanly organized into purpose-labeled sections ('When the user asks…', 'When about to make…', 'When called with no specific query'), so the simple-skill exception grants a 5.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Description

78%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.

A strong, trigger-rich description that bounds its niche tightly and lists several concrete scenarios. Its main weakness is that the 'what this does' side is lightly implied rather than explicitly stated alongside the very explicit 'Use when' triggers.

Suggestions

Lead with a brief explicit 'what' clause (e.g., 'Surfaces the architectural rationale behind code via Repowise') before the 'Use when' trigger list so both what and when are equally explicit.

Add a few natural synonyms users say — 'rationale', 'design choice', 'alternatives' — to round out trigger-term coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain (architectural decisions) and several concrete trigger scenarios — 'asks why code is built a certain way, proposes architectural changes, compares implementation approaches' — with only minor coverage gaps, fitting the 'lists several specific actions' anchor rather than the fully comprehensive 5.

4 / 5

Completeness

It has an explicit 'Use when...' clause with concrete triggers (the 'when') and an implied 'what' (architectural decisions / the why behind code), but the 'what' is only weakly stated compared to the strongly explicit 'when', so it does not reach the fully explicit 5.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Good coverage of natural terms and explicit markers ('WHY, DECISION, TRADEOFF, or ADR', 'architectural changes'), but a few common synonyms a user might say ('rationale', 'alternatives', 'design choice') are missing, so it sits between 3 and 5 at 4.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

It carves a clear niche bounded by 'Repowise-indexed repository' and the distinctive WHY/DECISION/TRADEOFF/ADR markers, giving it minimal overlap with other skills.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

20

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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
repowise-dev/repowise
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.