dotnet-backend-patterns

Master C#/.NET backend development patterns for building robust APIs, MCP servers, and enterprise applications. Covers async/await, dependency injection, Entity Framework Core, Dapper, configuration, caching, and testing with xUnit. Use when developing .NET backends, reviewing C# code, or designing API architectures.

Quality

62%

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/dotnet-backend-patterns/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

35%

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

The skill is organized into clear sections and stays brief, but the Instructions are abstract verbs with no executable guidance, and progressive disclosure is broken: it points to a non-existent resources/ file while ignoring the real references/ and assets/ bundle. Concrete code references and a valid pointer are the biggest gaps.

Suggestions

Replace the abstract Instruction verbs with concrete, executable guidance — at minimum reference and show how to use assets/repository-template.cs and assets/service-template.cs, or link references/dapper-patterns.md and references/ef-core-best-practices.md for the relevant patterns.

Fix the broken reference: `resources/implementation-playbook.md` does not exist — either create it or point to the actual bundle files under references/ and assets/.

Move the time-sensitive "(2024/2025)" note into a clearly labeled deprecated/old-patterns section, or remove it, so it does not penalize conciseness.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is short and well-sectioned, but the Instruction bullets are generic boilerplate verbs and the intro carries the time-sensitive "(2024/2025)" version tag, which the guideline says should penalize conciseness when not placed in a deprecated/old-patterns section.	2 / 3
Actionability	Instructions such as "Define architecture boundaries, modules, and layering" and "Apply DI, async patterns, and resilience strategies" describe rather than instruct — there is no concrete code, command, or example, even though executable .cs templates exist in assets/ that could be referenced.	1 / 3
Workflow Clarity	A loosely ordered bullet list of considerations is present, but there is no real sequenced workflow and no validation checkpoints for the claimed multi-area process, matching the score-2 anchor of steps listed without checkpoints.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	Sections are clear and a one-level reference pointer is signaled, but the body references `resources/implementation-playbook.md` which does not exist, while the actual bundle files (references/dapper-patterns.md, references/ef-core-best-practices.md, assets/*.cs) are never surfaced — navigation is therefore partially broken.	2 / 3
	Total	7 / 12 Passed

Description

90%

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, well-structured description that clearly states capabilities and explicit use-when triggers with good distinctiveness. The only meaningful issue is the imperative "Master…" lead, which reads as second-person voice rather than the third-person indicative style used by the reference examples.

Suggestions

Rephrase the lead in third-person indicative voice (e.g., "Guides C#/.NET backend development patterns for building robust APIs…") to avoid the second-person imperative penalty.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description lists multiple concrete capabilities ("building robust APIs, MCP servers, and enterprise applications" plus async/await, DI, EF Core, Dapper, caching, xUnit), but leads with the imperative "Master C#/.NET backend development patterns" which is second-person voice; per the guideline this reduces the specificity score by one from a base of 3.	2 / 3
Completeness	It explicitly answers both what (the listed patterns and technologies) and when (an explicit "Use when…" clause naming three trigger scenarios), matching the score-3 anchor.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	"Use when developing .NET backends, reviewing C# code, or designing API architectures" covers natural terms a user would actually say (.NET backends, C# code, API architectures, MCP servers), with good variation coverage.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The .NET/C# backend niche with explicit triggers ("developing .NET backends", "reviewing C# code") is clearly distinguishable and unlikely to fire for unrelated skills.	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: rmyndharis/antigravity-skills
Path: skills/dotnet-backend-patterns/SKILL.md
Commit: e63f7dd

Reviewed: about 4 hours 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.