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 description is critically deficient across all dimensions. It provides no information about what the skill does, when it should be used, or what domain it covers. It reads as a placeholder or auto-generated stub rather than a functional skill description.
Suggestions
Add concrete actions describing what this skill does (e.g., 'Designs v3 API integration architectures, maps data flows between services, generates integration schemas').
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms (e.g., 'Use when the user needs help with v3 API integration, service architecture, data mapping, or system interconnection').
Replace the invocation instruction with a functional description — invocation syntax belongs in usage documentation, not in the description field used for skill selection.
| 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 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 term 'integration-architect' is vague and could overlap with many integration, architecture, or design-related skills. There are no distinct triggers to differentiate it. | 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 an aspirational design document masquerading as an actionable skill. It contains extensive but non-executable TypeScript pseudocode, repeats performance targets multiple times, and provides no concrete steps Claude could actually follow. The content would benefit enormously from being condensed to a concise overview with actual executable commands and splitting detailed sections into referenced files.
Suggestions
Replace pseudocode TypeScript classes with actual executable commands or real code snippets that Claude can run (e.g., specific CLI commands, real file operations, actual migration scripts).
Eliminate repeated performance numbers (2.49x-7.47x, 150x-12,500x, <0.05ms) that appear in multiple sections—state them once in a summary table.
Split detailed integration sections (SONA, Flash Attention, AgentDB, MCP Tools, RL) into separate reference files and link to them from a concise overview.
Add explicit validation checkpoints between migration phases (e.g., 'Run `npm test` and verify all tests pass before proceeding to Phase 2').
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Extremely verbose at 300+ lines. Massive amounts of illustrative TypeScript that is not executable (placeholder methods like `this.adaptToNewAPI`, `this.executeWithSONA` with no real implementations). Repeats the same performance numbers (2.49x-7.47x, 150x-12,500x) multiple times across sections. The duplication analysis table appears in both the hooks and the body. Much of this is aspirational documentation rather than actionable instruction. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | Despite the volume of TypeScript code, none of it is executable—it's all pseudocode with undefined methods, placeholder interfaces, and aspirational class structures. There are no concrete commands to run, no real file paths to edit, and no copy-paste-ready instructions. The code describes intent rather than providing implementable guidance. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | There is a phased migration plan (Phase 1-3 with week targets) and a checklist of success metrics, which provides some sequential structure. However, there are no validation checkpoints between steps, no feedback loops for error recovery, and the phases contain only pseudocode rather than concrete verification steps. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | This is a monolithic wall of content with no references to external files for detailed information. Everything—integration strategy, feature integration, migration plan, performance targets, coordination points, risk mitigation—is inlined into a single massive document with no navigation aids or cross-references. | 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.