agent-repo-architect
Agent skill for repo-architect - invoke with $agent-repo-architect
39
7%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
94%
4.94xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.agents/skills/agent-repo-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 fails on every dimension. It provides no information about what the skill does, when it should be used, or what triggers should activate it. It reads as a placeholder rather than a functional description, making it essentially useless for skill selection among multiple options.
Suggestions
Add concrete actions describing what repo-architect does (e.g., 'Analyzes repository structure, generates architecture diagrams, suggests directory organization, reviews project layout').
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms (e.g., 'Use when the user asks about repository structure, project architecture, directory organization, codebase layout, or folder structure').
Replace the invocation instruction ('invoke with $agent-repo-architect') with functional description content — invocation syntax belongs in the skill body, not the description field.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description contains no concrete actions whatsoever. 'Agent skill for repo-architect' 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 potentially relevant term is 'repo-architect', which is a tool name rather than a natural keyword a user would say. There are no natural language trigger terms like 'repository structure', 'project layout', 'architecture', etc. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The description is so vague that it's impossible to distinguish it from any other agent skill. Without knowing what 'repo-architect' does, there's no way to differentiate it from other repository or architecture-related skills. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
14%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is excessively verbose, mixing generic architectural advice with pseudo-executable code examples that contain placeholder content. It lacks critical validation and error-handling steps for batch operations that modify multiple repositories, and dumps everything into a single monolithic document. The content would benefit greatly from being condensed to essential instructions with external references for patterns and templates.
Suggestions
Add explicit validation checkpoints after each batch operation (e.g., verify repository was created successfully before pushing files, validate pushed files exist after push_files call) - this is critical for destructive multi-repo operations.
Remove generic 'Best Practices', 'Monitoring and Analysis', and 'Integration with Development Workflow' sections that contain only abstract advice Claude already knows, or replace them with specific, actionable commands.
Replace placeholder content like '[Integration issue template]' and '[Standardized PR template]' with actual executable content or move them to referenced template files.
Split the monolithic content into a concise SKILL.md overview (~50 lines) with references to separate files for architecture patterns (PATTERNS.md), batch operations (BATCH_OPS.md), and templates (TEMPLATES.md).
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Extremely verbose at ~250+ lines with significant redundancy. Explains high-level concepts Claude already knows (what monorepo structure is, what 'best practices' means), includes lengthy boilerplate JSON/YAML that could be referenced externally, and the 'Best Practices' and 'Monitoring and Analysis' sections are generic platitudes with no actionable specifics. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | Contains concrete code examples with specific MCP tool calls and file structures, but the code is pseudocode-like JavaScript that isn't directly executable (e.g., `repositories.forEach` calling MCP tools as if they were JS functions, placeholder content like '[Integration issue template]'). Many examples use placeholder strings rather than real content. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Despite involving destructive/batch operations (pushing files across multiple repos, creating repositories, cross-repo synchronization), there are no validation checkpoints, no error handling, no feedback loops, and no verification steps. The 'Complete Repository Architecture Optimization' batch operation marks todos as 'completed' before they're actually done, with no validation gates. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Monolithic wall of text with everything inline. Over 250 lines of content with no references to external files for detailed patterns, templates, or examples. The architecture patterns, integration patterns, and batch operations could all be split into separate referenced documents. | 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/ruflo
- Commit
398f7c2
- 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.