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 is an extremely minimal description that fails on all dimensions. It provides no information about what the skill does, when to use it, or what domain it operates in. It reads as a placeholder rather than a functional description.

Suggestions

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

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms that users would say when they need this skill

Remove the invocation syntax from the description and replace it with domain-specific keywords that distinguish 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. There is no 'Use when...' clause and no description of functionality.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	The only keyword is 'raft-manager', which is technical jargon. There are no natural language terms a user would say when needing this skill. The invocation syntax '$agent-raft-manager' is not a trigger term.	1 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The description is so vague that it provides no distinguishing information. 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 architectural description of the Raft consensus algorithm rather than an actionable skill for Claude. It entirely lacks concrete code, commands, tool usage, or specific implementation details—everything is abstract description of concepts Claude already understands. The content would need a complete rewrite to provide actual executable guidance.

Suggestions

Replace abstract descriptions with concrete, executable code examples or commands for each core operation (e.g., how to trigger an election, how to replicate a log entry, specific API calls or CLI commands).

Add explicit multi-step workflows with validation checkpoints for critical operations like leader election and node recovery, including error handling and retry logic.

Remove explanations of what Raft is and how it works conceptually—Claude already knows this. Focus only on project-specific implementation details, configurations, and tool invocations.

Add references to detailed files (e.g., ELECTION.md, REPLICATION.md) for complex sub-processes, or inline the specific commands and configurations needed.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The content is verbose and explains concepts Claude already knows well (Raft consensus, leader election, log replication). It reads like a textbook summary of the Raft algorithm rather than providing new, actionable information. Phrases like 'Ensure reliable propagation of entries to followers' and 'Maintain log consistency across all cluster nodes' are descriptions of what Raft does, not instructions on how to do something specific.	1 / 3
Actionability	There are no concrete commands, code examples, API calls, or executable guidance anywhere in the content. Every bullet point is an abstract description ('Execute randomized timeout-based elections', 'Implement append entries protocol') without any specifics about how to actually perform these operations—no code, no tool invocations, no configuration examples.	1 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Despite describing inherently multi-step processes (leader election, log replication, recovery), there are no sequenced steps, no validation checkpoints, and no feedback loops. The content lists responsibilities and features but never defines a clear workflow for any operation.	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 separation of overview from detailed content, and the references to other managers are vague without clear navigation paths.	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/ruflo
Commit: 0f7c750

Reviewed: 3 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.