agent-arch-system-design
Agent skill for arch-system-design - invoke with $agent-arch-system-design
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:ruvnet/claude-flow --skill agent-arch-system-design28
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillValidation for skill structure
Discovery
0%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This description is critically deficient across all dimensions. It functions only as an invocation reference rather than a functional description, providing no information about capabilities, use cases, or trigger conditions. Claude would have no basis for selecting this skill appropriately from a skill library.
Suggestions
Add concrete actions describing what the skill does (e.g., 'Designs system architectures, creates component diagrams, evaluates scalability patterns, documents technical decisions')
Include a 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms (e.g., 'Use when the user asks about system architecture, scalability, microservices, API design, or technical design decisions')
Remove the invocation syntax from the description and replace with functional content that helps Claude understand the skill's purpose
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description contains no concrete actions whatsoever. 'Agent skill for arch-system-design' is completely abstract and doesn't describe what the skill actually does. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The description fails to answer both 'what does this do' and 'when should Claude use it'. It only provides an invocation command, not functional information. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | The only potential trigger term is 'arch-system-design' which is technical jargon, not natural language users would say. No natural keywords like 'architecture', 'system design', 'design patterns', etc. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | While 'arch-system-design' sounds specific, the lack of any actual description means Claude cannot distinguish when to use this vs other architecture or design-related skills. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
22%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill content reads more like a job description than actionable guidance. It lists what a system architect should do but provides no concrete examples, templates, workflows, or executable instructions. The extensive YAML frontmatter suggests sophisticated configuration, but the actual body content lacks the specificity needed for Claude to perform architecture tasks effectively.
Suggestions
Add a concrete ADR template with a filled-in example showing the expected format and level of detail
Include a step-by-step workflow for architecture design (e.g., 1. Gather requirements → 2. Identify components → 3. Draft diagram → 4. Review trade-offs → 5. Document decision)
Provide at least one concrete C4 diagram example in PlantUML syntax that Claude can adapt
Add a technology evaluation matrix template with example criteria and scoring
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is moderately efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation. Lists like 'Key responsibilities' and 'Best practices' contain items Claude already knows (e.g., 'Consider non-functional requirements', 'Think about future extensibility'). The deliverables and decision framework sections add value but could be tighter. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The content is almost entirely abstract guidance with no concrete examples, templates, or executable instructions. Phrases like 'Design scalable, maintainable system architectures' and 'Use standard diagramming notations' describe rather than instruct. No actual ADR template, diagram example, or specific command is provided. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | There is no clear workflow or sequence of steps. The content lists responsibilities and deliverables but doesn't explain how to actually perform the architecture design process. No validation checkpoints or feedback loops are mentioned for reviewing architectural decisions. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is reasonably organized with clear section headers, but it's a single monolithic file with no references to external detailed resources (e.g., ADR templates, diagram examples, pattern catalogs). For a complex architecture skill, more progressive disclosure would be expected. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 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.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- 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.