agent-raft-manager

Agent skill for raft-manager - invoke with $agent-raft-manager

0.96x

Quality

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

90%

0.96x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.agents/skills/agent-raft-manager/SKILL.md

Quality

Discovery

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 essentially a placeholder that provides no useful information about the skill's capabilities, domain, or appropriate usage context. It only names the skill and its invocation command, which is insufficient for Claude to make informed selection decisions among multiple skills.

Suggestions

Add concrete actions describing what raft-manager actually does (e.g., 'Manages Raft consensus protocol configurations, monitors cluster health, handles leader election')

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms that describe scenarios where this skill should be selected

Replace the generic 'Agent skill for raft-manager' framing with a specific capability summary that distinguishes this skill from others

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description contains no concrete actions whatsoever. 'Agent skill for raft-manager' 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. 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 'raft-manager', which is a technical/internal name rather than a natural term a user would say. No natural language trigger terms are present.	1 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The description is so vague that it provides no distinguishing characteristics. Without knowing what 'raft-manager' does, Claude cannot differentiate this from any other agent skill.	1 / 3
	Total	4 / 12 Passed

Implementation

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

This skill reads as a high-level design document or README describing what a Raft consensus manager does, rather than an actionable skill teaching Claude how to perform specific tasks. It contains no executable code, no concrete commands, no examples, and no validation steps. The entire content restates well-known Raft concepts that Claude already understands, making it almost entirely redundant.

Suggestions

Replace abstract descriptions with concrete, executable code or commands — e.g., actual election timeout logic, heartbeat implementation, or specific CLI commands to manage cluster state.

Add a clear multi-step workflow with validation checkpoints for critical operations like leader election and log replication (e.g., 'Step 1: Check quorum → Step 2: Initiate election → Step 3: Validate vote count → Step 4: Announce leader').

Remove explanations of Raft fundamentals that Claude already knows and focus only on project-specific implementation details, configurations, and constraints.

Add concrete examples with expected inputs/outputs, such as sample log entries, election scenarios, or partition recovery procedures.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The content is verbose and describes concepts Claude already knows well (Raft consensus, leader election, log replication). It reads like a textbook summary rather than actionable instructions, with phrases like 'Ensure reliable propagation of entries to followers' that add no new information.	1 / 3
Actionability	There is zero concrete, executable guidance — no code, no commands, no specific examples, no configuration snippets. Every bullet point is an abstract description ('Execute randomized timeout-based elections') rather than an instruction Claude can act on.	1 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Despite describing a multi-step distributed systems process (elections, replication, recovery), there are no sequenced steps, no validation checkpoints, and no feedback loops. The content lists responsibilities without defining how to actually perform them.	1 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The content has some structural organization with headers and subsections, and the Collaboration section references other components. However, there are no links to detailed reference files, no examples split out, and the content is a monolithic description without clear navigation to deeper materials.	2 / 3
	Total	5 / 12 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

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.

Repository: ruvnet/claude-flow
Commit: f547cec

Reviewed: 4 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.