agent-v3-integration-architect
Agent skill for v3-integration-architect - invoke with $agent-v3-integration-architect
38
6%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
93%
4.42xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.agents/skills/agent-v3-integration-architect/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 virtually no useful information for skill selection. It contains no actions, no trigger terms, no 'when to use' guidance, and no domain specificity—only an invocation command. It would be nearly impossible for Claude to correctly select this skill from a pool of available options.
Suggestions
Describe what the skill actually does with concrete actions (e.g., 'Designs v3 API integration architectures, maps data flows between systems, generates integration schemas').
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms users would say (e.g., 'Use when the user needs help with API integration design, system interconnection, data mapping, or migration to v3').
Clarify what 'v3' refers to and what domain this skill operates in to make it clearly distinguishable from other architecture or integration skills.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description contains no concrete actions whatsoever. It only states it's an 'agent skill' and provides an invocation command, with no indication of what the skill actually does. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | Neither 'what does this do' nor 'when should Claude use it' is answered. The description is essentially just an invocation instruction with no functional or contextual information. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | There are no natural keywords a user would say. 'v3-integration-architect' is technical jargon that doesn't map to any user intent or natural language query. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The description is so vague that it provides no distinguishing characteristics. 'Integration architect' could overlap with countless integration, architecture, or API-related skills without any way to differentiate. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
12%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is a project planning document masquerading as an actionable skill. It is extremely verbose, filled with non-executable TypeScript pseudocode that describes aspirational architecture rather than providing concrete, copy-paste-ready implementation guidance. The content would benefit enormously from being condensed to a concise overview with references to detailed implementation files, and replacing conceptual code with actual executable commands and real file operations.
Suggestions
Replace all pseudocode TypeScript classes with actual executable commands or real code snippets that Claude can run — e.g., specific file operations, actual CLI commands, or concrete refactoring steps with real file paths.
Condense the main skill to under 80 lines covering the core workflow (identify duplicates → create adapter → migrate → validate → cleanup) and move detailed integration specs (SONA, Flash Attention, AgentDB, RL) to separate reference files.
Add explicit validation checkpoints between migration phases — e.g., 'Run test suite X and confirm Y before proceeding to Phase 2' — rather than just listing success metrics as unchecked boxes at the end.
Remove redundant information: the duplication analysis appears in both the pre_execution hook and the body content, and performance targets are stated multiple times in different sections.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Extremely verbose at 300+ lines. Most TypeScript code is non-executable pseudocode/interface definitions that describe intent rather than provide actionable implementation. Massive duplication between the 'Duplication Analysis' in hooks, the ASCII table, and repeated performance targets. Benchmark objects are just config literals with no executable value. Claude doesn't need explanations of what RL algorithms are or what Flash Attention does. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | Despite abundant code blocks, none are executable — they are conceptual TypeScript sketches with placeholder methods like `this.adaptToNewAPI()`, `this.extractSwarmConfig()`, etc. No concrete commands, no real file paths, no actual implementation steps. The code describes what should happen rather than showing how to do it. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | There is a phased migration plan (Phase 1-3 with week targets) and checklists for success metrics, which provides some sequential structure. However, there are no validation checkpoints between phases, no feedback loops for error recovery, and the phases contain only pseudocode rather than concrete verification steps. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Monolithic wall of content with no references to external files. Everything is inlined — integration architecture, migration plan, performance targets, coordination points, risk mitigation — all in one massive document. Content like the detailed RL algorithm list, benchmark configs, and coordination points could easily be split into separate reference files. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 5 / 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.
- 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.