CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

agent-repo-architect

Agent skill for repo-architect - invoke with $agent-repo-architect

39

4.94x
Quality

7%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

94%

4.94x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

SecuritybySnyk

Advisory

Suggest reviewing before use

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.agents/skills/agent-repo-architect/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

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 with hardcoded, user-specific content (ruvnet repos, specific paths) that limits reusability. It lacks validation checkpoints for destructive operations like pushing files across repositories, and mixes non-executable pseudocode with placeholder content. The generic best practices and monitoring sections add token cost without providing actionable guidance Claude doesn't already possess.

Suggestions

Add explicit validation and verification steps after each destructive operation (repo creation, file pushing, cross-repo sync) — e.g., verify the push succeeded before proceeding, validate file contents after creation.

Remove generic best practices and monitoring sections that Claude already knows (structure optimization principles, documentation best practices) and replace with specific, executable validation commands.

Split architecture patterns, template examples, and batch operations into separate referenced files to reduce the main skill to a concise overview with clear navigation.

Replace placeholder content like '[Architecture documentation]' and '[Standardized PR template]' with actual executable examples, or remove them entirely if they can't be made concrete.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Extremely verbose at ~250+ lines. Contains extensive boilerplate, placeholder content like '[Integration issue template]', redundant best practices lists that Claude already knows, and lengthy code blocks with hardcoded user-specific paths and repo names that aren't generalizable. The monitoring, best practices, and integration sections are generic filler.

1 / 3

Actionability

Contains concrete tool invocations and code examples with specific MCP tool calls, but much of the code is pseudocode-like JavaScript that isn't directly executable (e.g., `repositories.forEach` calling MCP tools as if they were JS functions, `Date.now()` in JSON-like structures). Placeholder content like '[Architecture documentation]' and '[Standardized PR template]' reduces actionability.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

Despite being a multi-step architecture skill involving destructive operations (pushing files, creating repos, cross-repo synchronization), there are no validation checkpoints, no error handling, no feedback loops, and no verification steps. The 'batch architecture operations' section lists steps sequentially but marks todos as 'completed' before they could actually be verified.

1 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

Monolithic wall of text with no references to external files despite the content being long enough to warrant splitting. Architecture patterns, best practices, monitoring sections, and detailed code examples are all inline. No bundle files are provided, and no external references are made, yet the content would clearly benefit from being split across multiple files.

1 / 3

Total

5

/

12

Passed

Description

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 all dimensions. It provides no information about what the skill does, when it should be used, or what triggers should activate it. It reads more like a label than a functional description, making it nearly impossible for Claude to correctly select this skill from a pool of available options.

Suggestions

Add concrete actions the skill performs, e.g., 'Analyzes repository structure, generates architecture diagrams, scaffolds project directory layouts, and recommends folder organization patterns.'

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about repository structure, project organization, folder layout, scaffolding a new project, or architecture planning.'

Remove the invocation instruction ('invoke with $agent-repo-architect') from the description since it doesn't help Claude decide when to select the skill, and replace it with distinctive capability details.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description provides no concrete actions whatsoever. 'Agent skill for repo-architect' is entirely vague 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 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', etc.

1 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The description is so vague that it's impossible to distinguish it from any other agent skill. 'Repo-architect' hints at repository architecture but provides no specifics to differentiate it from other code or repository-related skills.

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.

Validation11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
ruvnet/ruflo
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.