agent-v3-performance-engineer
Agent skill for v3-performance-engineer - invoke with $agent-v3-performance-engineer
35
0%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
96%
3.20xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.agents/skills/agent-v3-performance-engineer/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 an invocation command. It fails on every dimension: no concrete actions, no trigger terms, no 'what' or 'when' guidance, and no distinguishing characteristics. Claude would have no basis to select this skill appropriately from a list of available skills.
Suggestions
Add specific concrete actions the skill performs, e.g., 'Profiles application performance, identifies bottlenecks, optimizes query execution, and analyzes resource utilization metrics.'
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about performance optimization, load testing, latency reduction, memory profiling, or application benchmarking.'
Remove the invocation command from the description (it's operational metadata, not descriptive content) and replace with domain-specific keywords users would naturally use.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description contains no concrete actions whatsoever. It only states it's an 'agent skill' with an invocation command, providing zero information 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 provides an invocation command with no functional or contextual information. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | The only potentially relevant term is 'performance-engineer' embedded in the agent name, but there are no natural keywords a user would say. No terms like 'optimize', 'benchmark', 'latency', 'profiling', etc. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The description is so vague that Claude would have no basis to distinguish this skill from others. The term 'performance-engineer' hints at a domain but is far too ambiguous to create a clear niche. | 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 a verbose, aspirational document that describes performance targets and hypothetical benchmark classes rather than providing actionable guidance. The TypeScript code appears comprehensive but is entirely non-executable pseudo-code referencing non-existent APIs. It reads more like a project planning document or wishlist than a skill that teaches Claude how to perform specific tasks.
Suggestions
Replace pseudo-code benchmark classes with actual executable commands or scripts that can be run to measure performance (e.g., real npm scripts, actual CLI commands with expected output).
Add a clear step-by-step workflow: what to do first, how to run benchmarks, how to interpret results, and what to do when targets aren't met - with explicit validation checkpoints.
Reduce content by 70%+ by removing ASCII box diagrams, removing the lengthy non-executable TypeScript classes, and focusing on concrete actions Claude should take.
Extract detailed benchmark implementations into separate referenced files and keep SKILL.md as a concise overview with navigation links.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Extremely verbose at ~300+ lines. The ASCII box diagrams are decorative and redundant with the text. The TypeScript benchmark classes are lengthy pseudo-implementations that Claude cannot actually execute - they reference non-existent APIs (this.sona.adapt, this.agentDBMemory.hnswSearch, etc.). The coordination section and mission statement add fluff without actionable value. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | Despite containing extensive TypeScript code, none of it is executable - all classes reference undefined methods, non-existent libraries, and hypothetical APIs. There are no concrete commands to run, no real file paths, no actual benchmark scripts. The checklist items are aspirational targets, not actionable steps. This describes rather than instructs. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | There is no clear workflow sequence for performing optimization or benchmarking. The content presents benchmark classes and target matrices but never explains what steps to take, in what order, or how to validate results. No feedback loops or error recovery for the complex multi-step performance optimization process described. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Monolithic wall of content with no references to external files. All benchmark code is inlined despite being hundreds of lines of non-executable pseudo-code. No navigation structure - just sequential sections with no clear hierarchy or pointers to detailed resources. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 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.