CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

database-admin

Expert database administrator specializing in modern cloud databases, automation, and reliability engineering. Masters AWS/Azure/GCP database services, Infrastructure as Code, high availability, disaster recovery, performance optimization, and compliance. Handles multi-cloud strategies, container databases, and cost optimization. Use PROACTIVELY for database architecture, operations, or reliability engineering.

44

Quality

46%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/database-admin/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

31%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 skill body is a verbose role definition that enumerates database knowledge Claude already possesses and offers only generic, non-executable guidance. It has a sequenced response workflow but lacks validation checkpoints, and it makes no use of progressive disclosure through reference files.

Suggestions

Cut the enumerated technology catalogs (Cloud Database Platforms, Modern Database Technologies, etc.) — Claude already knows these — and keep only the non-obvious decisions, heuristics, and procedures specific to this skill.

Replace the generic Instructions with concrete, executable steps: example commands for backup verification, failover testing, replication-lag checks, and migration procedures.

Add explicit validation/feedback checkpoints to the Response Approach (e.g., "Verify backup restorability before proceeding", "Test failover after configuration", "Re-run health checks on error") to lift workflow clarity above the database-operation cap of 3.

Move detailed capability catalogs and example runbooks into reference files (e.g., references/HA-DR.md, references/cost-optimization.md) and link them one level deep from SKILL.md.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body extensively enumerates technology catalogs Claude already knows (RDS, Aurora, DynamoDB, PostgreSQL, Cassandra, Terraform, etc.) across ~135 lines, and the Purpose/Knowledge Base sections restate the description, so it is noticeably verbose with several padded sections rather than lean.

2 / 5

Actionability

The Instructions are abstract ("Clarify goals... Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes") and the Response Approach is a high-level outline ("Assess database requirements", "Design database architecture") with no concrete commands, code, or specific procedures, giving minimal executable guidance.

2 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The Response Approach provides a clear 9-step sequence, but it contains no explicit validation checkpoints or fix-and-retry feedback loops; per the rubric's database-operation feedback-loop cap, this caps workflow clarity at 3 even though the sequence is coherent.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist and the entire capability catalog, behavioral traits, and knowledge base are inlined in SKILL.md with no references to separate files, so content that clearly belongs in reference files is inlined despite the section headers providing some structure.

2 / 5

Total

9

/

20

Passed

Description

62%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 clearly communicates a database-administration niche with explicit what and when guidance, giving it solid completeness and distinctiveness. It is weakened by expertise-framing verbs instead of concrete actions and by missing common natural trigger terms users would actually say.

Suggestions

Rewrite capability verbs as concrete actions (e.g., "Provision and replicate cloud databases", "Tune query performance", "Automate backups and failover") instead of "Masters" / "Handles" / "specializing in".

Add natural trigger synonyms users actually say — "SQL", "backups", "migration", "DBA", "query tuning", "replication" — to the Use-when clause.

Broaden the "Use PROACTIVELY for..." clause beyond architecture/operations/reliability to include backup/recovery, migration, and security/compliance scenarios.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain plus many specific areas ("AWS/Azure/GCP database services, Infrastructure as Code, high availability, disaster recovery, performance optimization, and compliance"), but the verbs "Masters", "Handles", and "specializing in" describe expertise areas rather than concrete executable actions, so it sits at the 3/4 boundary and lands at 3.

3 / 5

Completeness

It explicitly answers both "what" ("Expert database administrator specializing in modern cloud databases, automation, and reliability engineering") and "when" ("Use PROACTIVELY for database architecture, operations, or reliability engineering"), but the when-clause is somewhat narrow and could name more concrete triggers, so it does not reach the comprehensive 5 anchor.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

It includes relevant professional phrases a user might say ("database architecture", "disaster recovery", "performance optimization", "high availability"), but it omits common natural synonyms and terms users actually say like "SQL", "backup", "migration", "DBA", and "query", matching the "some relevant keywords but missing common variations" anchor.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"database administrator" with triggers like "database architecture, operations, or reliability engineering" carves a clear niche with minimal conflict risk against non-database skills, though there is minor overlap risk with adjacent cloud-infrastructure or DevOps skills, matching the mostly-distinct 4 anchor rather than the minimal-risk 5.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
rmyndharis/antigravity-skills
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.