agent-performance-monitor
Agent skill for performance-monitor - invoke with $agent-performance-monitor
35
0%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
100%
2.43xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.agents/skills/agent-performance-monitor/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
0%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is an extremely weak description that provides essentially no useful information beyond the skill's name. It fails on all dimensions: it describes no concrete actions, includes no natural trigger terms, answers neither 'what' nor 'when', and is indistinguishable from any other monitoring-related skill.
Suggestions
Add specific concrete actions the skill performs, e.g., 'Monitors CPU usage, memory consumption, disk I/O, and network throughput for running processes and system resources.'
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about system performance, resource usage, slow processes, CPU load, memory leaks, or wants to profile application performance.'
Remove the invocation syntax from the description and replace it with capability-focused language that helps Claude distinguish this skill from other tools.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description contains no concrete actions whatsoever. 'Agent skill for performance-monitor' is entirely vague and does not describe what the skill actually does. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | Neither 'what does this do' nor 'when should Claude use it' is answered. There is no description of capabilities and no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | The only keyword is 'performance-monitor' which is a tool name, not a natural user term. Users would say things like 'check performance', 'CPU usage', 'memory', 'latency', etc. The invocation syntax '$agent-performance-monitor' is not a natural trigger term. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The description is so vague that 'performance-monitor' could overlap with any monitoring, profiling, benchmarking, or diagnostics skill. There are no distinct triggers to differentiate it. | 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 extensive but non-functional collection of illustrative JavaScript pseudocode and bash commands. None of the code is executable, no clear workflow is defined, and the massive volume of placeholder classes and methods wastes token budget without providing actionable guidance. The content reads more like a design document or architecture proposal than an operational skill.
Suggestions
Replace illustrative pseudocode with actual executable commands or code snippets that Claude can run, focusing on the CLI commands in the 'Operational Commands' section as the primary interface.
Add a clear step-by-step workflow (e.g., 1. Start monitoring, 2. Check metrics, 3. Analyze bottlenecks, 4. Validate SLA compliance) with explicit validation checkpoints at each stage.
Reduce the content by 80%+ by removing all placeholder class definitions and keeping only the concrete commands, expected outputs, and decision criteria.
Move any detailed reference material (analytics formulas, anomaly detection approaches) to separate linked files and keep SKILL.md as a concise overview with navigation.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Extremely verbose at ~500+ lines. Most code is non-executable pseudocode with placeholder methods (e.g., `this.getCPUUsage()`, `this.loadTimeSeriesModel()`) that explain concepts Claude already understands. Classes like StatisticalAnomalyDetector, MLAnomalyDetector are referenced but never defined. The entire file could be reduced to the operational commands section plus a brief architecture overview. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | Almost none of the code is executable—it's all illustrative pseudocode with undefined methods, unimported dependencies, and fictional MCP calls (e.g., `mcp.agent_list`, `mcp.bottleneck_analyze`). The bash commands at the end reference `npx claude-flow` subcommands that may or may not exist, with no verification steps. Nothing is copy-paste ready. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | There is no clear workflow or sequence of steps for performing performance monitoring. The content is organized as a collection of class definitions and code snippets with no ordering, no validation checkpoints, and no guidance on when or how to use each component. A user/agent would not know where to start or what sequence to follow. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The entire skill is a monolithic wall of code blocks with no references to external files and no layered structure. Hundreds of lines of illustrative code are inlined that could be separated into reference documents. The 'Integration Points' section hints at other agents but provides no links or navigation. | 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 (677 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- ruvnet/claude-flow
- Commit
f547cec
- 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.