CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

microservices-patterns

Design microservices architectures with service boundaries, event-driven communication, and resilience patterns. Use when building distributed systems, decomposing monoliths, or implementing microservices.

58

Quality

66%

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/microservices-patterns/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

50%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 body is well-structured and concise, but its guidance is high-level and the concrete detail is deferred to a missing playbook file, leaving it thin and not fully actionable. Adding the referenced playbook (or inlining concrete patterns) would substantially raise actionability and progressive_disclosure.

Suggestions

Create the referenced 'resources/implementation-playbook.md' (or inline its key patterns) so the '## Resources' link resolves and concrete guidance is available.

Expand the Instructions steps with specific, actionable patterns or examples (e.g., named patterns for service decomposition, event communication options, and resilience techniques like circuit breakers/retries) instead of category-level directives.

Add a brief validation/checklist step (e.g., verify each service owns its data, confirm contracts are versioned) to give the workflow explicit checkpoints.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean with well-organized Use/Don't-use and Instructions sections and no concept over-explanation; the only trimmable redundancy is the intro line restating the description, so it sits just below the top anchor.

4 / 5

Actionability

The instructions are high-level directives ('Identify domain boundaries...', 'Define contracts, data ownership, and communication patterns') with no concrete methodology, patterns, or examples, and the actionable detail is deferred to a playbook file that does not exist; this matches the anchor for minimal concrete guidance with high-level hints.

2 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear four-step numbered sequence is present (identify boundaries, define contracts, plan resilience, provide migration steps) but with no validation checkpoints or feedback loops; this is a design rather than destructive/batch skill so no hard cap applies, landing at the anchor for steps listed with missing checkpoints.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Section structure is good and the single reference is one level deep and clearly signaled under '## Resources', but the referenced 'resources/implementation-playbook.md' does not exist in the bundle, so navigation is broken and the overview lacks the detailed backing it implies.

3 / 5

Total

12

/

20

Passed

Description

83%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 is strong: it states concrete capabilities, gives explicit 'Use when' trigger guidance, and occupies a clear niche. The only weaknesses are slightly limited pattern coverage and the somewhat broad 'distributed systems' trigger that could overlap related skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the microservices domain and several concrete capability areas ('service boundaries, event-driven communication, and resilience patterns'), matching the anchor for several specific actions with minor gaps; not a 5 because coverage is limited to three pattern categories rather than comprehensive.

4 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both 'what' (Design microservices architectures with the listed patterns) and 'when' ('Use when building distributed systems, decomposing monoliths, or implementing microservices') with concrete trigger phrases, matching the top anchor.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

'building distributed systems, decomposing monoliths, or implementing microservices' are natural phrases users would say, giving good keyword coverage; not a 5 because common synonyms like 'service mesh' or 'API gateway' are absent.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Microservices-patterns is a clear niche with distinct triggers, but 'building distributed systems' is broad enough to risk minor overlap with general distributed-systems skills; not a 5 due to that overlap risk.

4 / 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
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.