agent-performance-benchmarker
Agent skill for performance-benchmarker - invoke with $agent-performance-benchmarker
31
0%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
81%
2.89xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.agents/skills/agent-performance-benchmarker/SKILL.mdQuality
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 is an extremely minimal description that fails on all dimensions. It provides no information about what the skill does, when it should be used, or what types of user requests should trigger it. It reads more like an invocation instruction than a skill description.
Suggestions
Add concrete actions describing what the skill does, e.g., 'Runs performance benchmarks on APIs/services, measures latency, throughput, and response times, generates comparison reports.'
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about performance testing, benchmarking, load testing, measuring response times, or comparing performance metrics.'
Specify the domain or type of performance benchmarking (e.g., web APIs, database queries, code execution) to distinguish it from other performance-related skills.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description contains no concrete actions whatsoever. It only says 'Agent skill for performance-benchmarker' which is entirely vague about what the skill actually does. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | Neither 'what does this do' nor 'when should Claude use it' is answered. The description only states it's an agent skill and how to invoke it, providing no functional or contextual information. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | The only keyword is 'performance-benchmarker' which is a tool name, not a natural term a user would say. There are no natural language trigger terms like 'benchmark', 'performance testing', 'latency', 'throughput', etc. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The term 'performance-benchmarker' is too vague to carve out a clear niche. Without specifying what kind of performance (web, database, API, CPU) or what benchmarking entails, it could overlap with many performance-related skills. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
0%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is an extremely verbose collection of non-executable pseudocode masquerading as a performance benchmarking framework. It provides no actionable guidance—every class depends on fictional infrastructure that doesn't exist. The content would be better served by a concise overview of what to benchmark, specific tools/commands to use, and a clear step-by-step workflow with validation checkpoints.
Suggestions
Replace fictional class hierarchies with actual executable code using real benchmarking tools (e.g., autocannon for HTTP throughput, perf_hooks for latency measurement, os module for resource monitoring)
Add a clear step-by-step workflow: 1) Set up benchmark environment, 2) Run throughput test, 3) Validate results, 4) Run latency test, 5) Generate comparison report—with concrete commands at each step
Reduce content by 80%+ by removing the elaborate class structures and focusing on the specific commands, configurations, and patterns Claude needs to actually perform benchmarking
Split detailed protocol-specific benchmarking guidance into separate referenced files and keep SKILL.md as a concise overview with quick-start instructions
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Extremely verbose at ~600+ lines of non-executable pseudocode. The code references fictional classes (TimeSeriesDatabase, SystemMonitor, PerformanceModel, etc.) that don't exist, making this essentially elaborate pseudocode dressed as real code. Massive token waste explaining concepts Claude already understands about benchmarking, percentile calculations, and resource monitoring. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | Despite the volume of code, none of it is executable. Every class depends on undefined imports and fictional infrastructure (PerformanceAlertSystem, LoadGenerator, SystemMonitor, MetricsCollector, etc.). There are no real commands, no installable packages, no concrete steps Claude could actually follow to benchmark anything. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | There is no clear workflow or sequence of steps to follow. The content is a collection of class definitions without any guidance on how to actually run a benchmark. No validation checkpoints, no error recovery steps, no ordered process for conducting performance analysis. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Monolithic wall of code with no references to external files and no meaningful structure beyond class-level organization. Everything is dumped inline with no navigation aids, no quick-start section, and no separation of overview from detailed implementation. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
skill_md_line_count | SKILL.md is long (856 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- ruvnet/claude-flow
- Commit
01070ed
- 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.