backend-developer
Backend Developer Agent. 코드 개발, 디버깅, 기능 구현을 담당합니다. 개발, 코딩, 디버그(debug), 버그 수정, 기능 구현 관련 요청 시 사용됩니다.
63
59%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Risky
Do not use without reviewing
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/backend-developer/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
82%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 has good structure with explicit 'what' and 'when' clauses and includes relevant trigger terms in Korean. However, it lacks specificity in concrete actions and could conflict with other development-related skills since the capabilities described are generic rather than backend-specific.
Suggestions
Add backend-specific actions and triggers such as 'API 개발', '데이터베이스', '서버', 'REST', 'SQL' to distinguish from frontend or general coding skills
List more concrete backend actions like 'API 엔드포인트 구현', '데이터베이스 쿼리 최적화', '서버 로직 개발' instead of generic '코드 개발'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (backend development) and lists some actions (코드 개발, 디버깅, 기능 구현 - code development, debugging, feature implementation), but these are fairly generic development activities rather than specific concrete actions. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what ('코드 개발, 디버깅, 기능 구현을 담당합니다' - handles code development, debugging, feature implementation) AND when ('개발, 코딩, 디버그, 버그 수정, 기능 구현 관련 요청 시 사용됩니다' - use when requests relate to development, coding, debug, bug fixes, feature implementation). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes good coverage of natural Korean terms users would say: '개발' (development), '코딩' (coding), '디버그/debug', '버그 수정' (bug fix), '기능 구현' (feature implementation). These are terms users would naturally use when requesting backend development help. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | While it specifies 'Backend Developer', the actual capabilities described (code development, debugging, feature implementation) are generic enough to overlap with frontend development, full-stack development, or general coding skills. The 'Backend' qualifier helps but isn't reinforced with backend-specific triggers like API, database, server, etc. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
37%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill provides a basic reference for NestJS backend development but lacks the depth and specificity needed for effective agent guidance. It covers standard conventions and generic commands that Claude already knows, while missing project-specific patterns, validation workflows, and actionable debugging sequences that would differentiate this from general NestJS knowledge.
Suggestions
Add step-by-step workflows with validation checkpoints for common tasks (e.g., 'Creating a new feature module: 1. Generate files, 2. Implement service, 3. Run tests, 4. Verify endpoint')
Replace generic NestJS CLI commands and conventions with project-specific patterns, custom decorators, or established architectural decisions unique to this codebase
Create a structured debugging workflow with decision trees (e.g., 'If connection error → check X, if timeout → check Y') rather than listing isolated commands
Add references to separate detailed files for complex topics like TypeORM entity patterns, Redis caching strategies, or API response formats used in this project
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Content is reasonably efficient but includes some information Claude already knows (basic NestJS CLI commands, standard naming conventions). The project structure section is useful but could be more targeted to project-specific patterns. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides some concrete commands and code snippets, but they are basic/generic (standard NestJS CLI, basic HttpException). Missing project-specific executable examples for actual feature implementation or debugging workflows. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | No clear multi-step workflows with validation checkpoints. The '주요 작업' section lists task types without sequences. Debugging section lists commands but lacks a structured troubleshooting workflow with feedback loops. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is organized into logical sections but everything is inline in one file. No references to detailed documentation for advanced topics like TypeORM patterns, Redis caching strategies, or complex debugging scenarios. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
allowed_tools_field | 'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s) | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- shaul1991/shaul-agents-plugin
- Commit
9242c58
- 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.