CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

performance-analysis

Comprehensive performance analysis, bottleneck detection, and optimization recommendations for Claude Flow swarms

2.77x
Quality

60%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

97%

2.77x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.claude/skills/performance-analysis/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

53%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 highly actionable with concrete, executable commands and examples throughout, but it is severely bloated and monolithic: no progressive disclosure into reference files, duplicated option lists, and no validated multi-step workflow for the batch '--fix' operations it promotes. Splitting into reference files and adding a lean validated workflow would raise both conciseness and structure.

Suggestions

Split the body: keep Quick Start and one command example per capability in SKILL.md, and move the full option tables, sample outputs, sample reports, CI/CD config, and the custom analysis script into references/ files (e.g. references/bottleneck-detection.md, references/reports.md, references/ci-integration.md) linked one level deep.

Add an explicit validation loop for '--fix' workflows: detect -> review the exported JSON -> apply --fix in a dev environment -> re-run detection to confirm impact, mirroring the best-practice advice as concrete steps.

Remove duplication (options appear in both 'Core Capabilities' and again per command) and cut the generic 'Best Practices' bullets ('Share with team regularly', 'Set improvement goals') that add no skill-specific value.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The ~580-line body is noticeably verbose: command options are listed twice, a 30-line sample terminal output and full sample report are inlined, and sections like 'Best Practices' pad with generic advice ('Share with team regularly', 'Learn from each analysis', 'Set improvement goals'). It matches anchor 2 (several unnecessary explanations or padded sections) rather than 3 (mostly efficient with some tightening possible).

2 / 5

Actionability

Nearly everything is copy-paste ready: concrete 'npx claude-flow' commands with documented flags, multiple usage examples per command, executable MCP JavaScript snippets, a complete CI/CD YAML workflow, and a runnable Node analysis script. This fully matches anchor 5 (fully executable, covers the common cases).

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The document is a command reference rather than a sequenced workflow, and the '--fix' flag applies batch automatic optimizations with no validation/verification checkpoint ('Always review before applying --fix' is advice, not a step). Per the guideline that missing validation in batch operations caps workflow clarity at 3, it cannot exceed 3 despite the good command-level structure.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist, and everything — full option tables, sample outputs, sample reports, CI/CD config, and custom scripts — is inlined in one monolithic SKILL.md. The 'See Also' links point to absolute paths ('/workspaces/claude-code-flow/...') and missing relative paths ('../swarm-orchestration/SKILL.md') rather than real bundled references. This matches anchor 2 (content that clearly belongs in separate files is inlined).

2 / 5

Total

12

/

20

Passed

Description

53%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 states a clear, moderately specific 'what' scoped to Claude Flow swarms, but provides zero guidance on when to invoke it and misses natural trigger phrases users would say. Adding an explicit 'Use when...' clause and natural-language triggers would move it into the good-example territory.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. 'Use when performance feels slow, when the user mentions bottlenecks, latency, profiling, or wants to optimize swarm throughput.'

Drop the filler word 'Comprehensive' and replace it with concrete capabilities (e.g. 'Profiles swarm operations, detects communication/memory/network bottlenecks, generates performance reports').

Include natural synonyms and tool-specific terms users would say (slow, metrics, report, claude-flow) to improve trigger-term coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain ('Claude Flow swarms') and a few actions ('bottleneck detection, and optimization recommendations'), but 'Comprehensive performance analysis' is generic padding and the coverage is not comprehensive (no mention of profiling, monitoring, or reporting). It sits at anchor 3 rather than 4 because the concrete actions listed are few and one is vague.

3 / 5

Completeness

The 'what' is reasonably clear (performance analysis, bottleneck detection, optimization recommendations), but there is no 'Use when...' clause or any equivalent trigger guidance. Per the judging guidelines, a missing 'Use when' clause caps completeness at 3, which is exactly the anchor ('clear what but when is missing').

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Terms like 'performance', 'bottleneck', and 'optimization' are relevant keywords, but common natural phrases users would actually say ('slow', 'latency', 'profiling', 'metrics') are missing. It has some relevant keywords but is missing common variations, matching anchor 3 rather than 4's 'good keyword coverage'.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The phrase 'for Claude Flow swarms' scopes the skill to a specific tool and workload, making it mostly distinct with only minor overlap risk against closely related monitoring/analysis skills. Not 5 because 'performance analysis' and 'optimization' alone are broad terms that could collide with generic profiling skills if the 'Claude Flow' qualifier is missed.

4 / 5

Total

13

/

20

Passed

Validation

75%

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

Validation — 12 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

skill_md_line_count

SKILL.md is long (581 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

relative_links

Relative link issues: 5 suspicious

Warning

referenced_paths_exist

Referenced path issues: 1 missing

Warning

Total

12

/

16

Passed

Repository

ruvnet/RuVector

Path

.claude/skills/performance-analysis/SKILL.md

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.