backend-development-feature-development

Orchestrate end-to-end backend feature development from requirements to deployment. Use when coordinating multi-phase feature delivery across teams and services.

Quality

58%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/backend-development-feature-development/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

57%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The content is a well-structured, highly actionable orchestration workflow with concrete agent prompts, but it is verbose in places and lacks inter-phase validation checkpoints for a destructive/batch process. No bundle files exist, so all detail is inlined rather than progressively disclosed.

Suggestions

Remove the 'Extended thinking' bracket and de-duplicate the methodology/strategy catalogs (keep them in one place) to tighten conciseness.

Insert explicit validation gates between phases (e.g., 'Confirm requirements are signed off before starting Phase 2'; 'Verify security scan passes before deployment') to earn a higher workflow-clarity score.

Move the full per-phase prompt templates and configuration catalogs into reference files (e.g., references/phases.md, references/config.md) and link to them from SKILL.md to improve progressive disclosure.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly efficient, but the bracketed 'Extended thinking' paragraph and the duplicated methodology/strategy listings (Configuration Options vs Execution Parameters) are unnecessary padding Claude does not need.	3 / 5
Actionability	Each phase supplies a concrete subagent_type and a copy-paste-ready prompt with $ARGUMENTS, expected output, and context; minor gaps remain in how prior-step outputs are injected ('[include business analysis from step 1]').	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The 4-phase / 12-step sequence is clearly laid out, but there are no explicit validation checkpoints between phases; because the skill drives production deployment and data migrations, workflow clarity is capped at 3 per the destructive/batch guidance.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Sections are well-organized with clear headers, but the ~195-line body is monolithic with no bundle files or references, and content that could live in separate files (full prompt templates, config catalogs) is inlined.	3 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Description

58%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

The description is third-person, includes an explicit 'Use when' trigger, and states both what and when, which places it above average. It is held back by jargony, non-comprehensive trigger terms and broad scope that raises conflict risk.

Suggestions

Add a few concrete, natural trigger phrases users would actually say (e.g., 'building a new backend feature', 'rolling out a multi-service change') to broaden trigger-term coverage.

List 2-3 specific capabilities (e.g., 'plans requirements, drives implementation, runs security validation, and manages staged rollout') to lift specificity beyond a single composite action.

Tighten the 'when' clause with multiple distinct triggering scenarios to reduce overlap with narrower dev or deployment skills.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain ('backend feature development') and a composite action ('orchestrate end-to-end ... from requirements to deployment'), but does not list multiple distinct concrete actions, so it is not comprehensive.	3 / 5
Completeness	Explicitly answers both what ('Orchestrate end-to-end backend feature development from requirements to deployment') and when ('Use when coordinating multi-phase feature delivery ...'), though the 'when' is a single condition that could be more specific.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Includes relevant phrases like 'multi-phase feature delivery' and 'across teams and services', but offers no synonyms or common variations a user might naturally say.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The backend feature-development niche is somewhat specific, but the end-to-end scope (requirements through deployment) creates overlap risk with general development or deployment skills.	3 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

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 — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills
Path: skills/backend-development-feature-development/SKILL.md
Commit: b1aebac

Reviewed: ~19 hours 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.