agent-raft-manager
Agent skill for raft-manager - invoke with $agent-raft-manager
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:ruvnet/claude-flow --skill agent-raft-manager28
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillValidation for skill structure
Discovery
0%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This description is critically deficient across all dimensions. It provides only a name and invocation command without explaining what the skill does, what actions it performs, or when it should be used. Claude would have no basis for selecting this skill appropriately from a list of available skills.
Suggestions
Add concrete actions describing what raft-manager does (e.g., 'Manages distributed consensus, handles leader election, monitors cluster health').
Include a 'Use when...' clause with explicit triggers (e.g., 'Use when working with distributed systems, cluster management, or consensus protocols').
Add natural keywords users might say when needing this functionality (e.g., 'cluster', 'nodes', 'leader election', 'distributed consensus', 'replication').
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description contains no concrete actions whatsoever. 'Agent skill for raft-manager' is completely abstract and does not describe what the skill actually does. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The description fails to answer both 'what does this do' and 'when should Claude use it'. It only provides an invocation command ('$agent-raft-manager') with no explanation of purpose or triggers. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | The only term present is 'raft-manager' which is technical jargon. No natural keywords a user would say are included - users wouldn't naturally ask about 'raft-manager' without knowing what it is. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | While 'raft-manager' is a specific term, the description is so vague that Claude cannot determine when to use it versus any other skill. The lack of context makes it impossible to distinguish its purpose. | 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 reads more like a design document or feature overview than an actionable skill file. It explains what Raft consensus involves conceptually but provides zero executable guidance, code examples, or concrete commands. Claude already understands Raft; this skill should focus on project-specific implementation details, actual code paths, and validation procedures.
Suggestions
Add concrete code examples or commands for invoking leader election, checking cluster state, and triggering log replication
Include a step-by-step workflow with validation checkpoints for common operations like adding/removing nodes or recovering from partition
Remove conceptual explanations of Raft (Claude knows this) and replace with project-specific implementation details, file paths, and API calls
Add links to related skill files or documentation for the mentioned collaborators (Quorum Manager, CRDT Synchronizer, etc.)
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is reasonably organized but includes some unnecessary explanation of Raft concepts Claude already knows (e.g., 'randomized timeout-based elections to prevent split votes'). The bullet points describe what Raft does rather than providing novel implementation guidance. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill is entirely abstract with no concrete code, commands, or executable examples. It describes what should happen ('Execute randomized timeout-based elections') but never shows how to actually implement or invoke any of these operations. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Despite describing complex multi-step processes like leader election and log replication, there are no clear sequences, validation checkpoints, or feedback loops. The content lists responsibilities without providing actionable workflows. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content has reasonable section structure with headers, but there are no references to external files for detailed implementation. The collaboration section mentions other components but doesn't link to them or explain how to access their documentation. | 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.