CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

framework-migration-legacy-modernize

Orchestrate a comprehensive legacy system modernization using the strangler fig pattern, enabling gradual replacement of outdated components while maintaining continuous business operations through ex

56

Quality

63%

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/framework-migration-legacy-modernize/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

77%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

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

The body is a well-sequenced, highly actionable orchestration workflow with strong validation checkpoints and context threading. Its main weaknesses are a concept-explainer preamble that pads the token budget and a monolithic structure with no progressive disclosure into reference files.

Suggestions

Remove or condense the Extended thinking paragraph that explains the strangler fig pattern — Claude already knows this concept — and shrink the generic 'Use/Do not use this skill when' boilerplate.

Move the long per-step subagent prompts, the Configuration Options, and the Success Criteria into separate reference files (e.g., prompts.md, configuration.md) linked one level deep from the overview to improve progressive disclosure.

Add a brief verification/feedback loop note at the end of each phase (e.g., 'confirm expected output exists before advancing to the next phase') to make the existing checkpoints explicit.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly efficient with concrete per-step prompts, but the Extended thinking paragraph explains the strangler fig concept Claude already knows ('named after the tropical fig tree... represents the gold standard') and the 'Use/Do not use this skill when' sections are generic boilerplate that could be tightened.

2 / 3

Actionability

Each step supplies a copy-paste Task-tool prompt, a named subagent_type, explicit context threading, and concrete thresholds such as the weighted scoring formula '(Business Value × 0.4) + (Technical Risk × 0.3) + (Quick Win Potential × 0.3)' and the rollout ladder '5% → 25% → 50% → 100%'.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

Five phases are clearly sequenced with numbered sub-steps, explicit 'Context from previous:' chaining, expected outputs per step, validation gates (characterization/contract tests before migration, performance validation), automatic rollback triggers, and a Success Criteria checklist.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist and the entire 130-line workflow — detailed subagent prompts, configuration options, and success criteria — lives inline in one monolithic file; content that could be split into references is not separated, though the sectioning is reasonable.

2 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Description

50%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

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 identifies a clear domain and a few concrete actions but is truncated mid-sentence, omits any explicit use-when trigger, and leans on buzzwords. It is adequate but not exemplary, landing at the midpoint across all dimensions.

Suggestions

Complete the truncated description and add an explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause naming natural user phrases (e.g., 'modernize legacy code', 'migrate legacy systems', 'strangler fig migration').

Trim filler like 'comprehensive', 'expert agent coordination', and 'gold standard' in favor of concrete capabilities (assess technical debt, build characterization tests, route traffic via an API gateway, decommission legacy components).

Add common trigger-term variations (legacy migration, system modernization, technical debt reduction) to reduce conflict with generic refactoring skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names concrete actions ('Orchestrate a comprehensive legacy system modernization using the strangler fig pattern', 'gradual replacement of outdated components', 'maintaining continuous business operations') but is padded with buzzwords ('comprehensive', 'expert agent coordination') and is truncated mid-word ('through ex'), leaving it not comprehensive.

2 / 3

Completeness

It states what the skill does, but never provides an explicit 'when to use' trigger clause, which caps completeness at 2 per the rubric; the truncated ending further weakens it.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

'legacy system modernization', 'strangler fig pattern', and 'outdated components' are plausible user phrases, but common variations and a natural 'Use when...' trigger are absent, and the truncation cuts off further trigger coverage.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The strangler-fig modernization niche is somewhat specific, but the absence of distinct trigger terms and broad over-claiming ('comprehensive', 'continuous business operations') leaves overlap risk with generic refactoring or code-quality skills.

2 / 3

Total

8

/

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.

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

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.