CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

bullmq-specialist

BullMQ expert for Redis-backed job queues, background processing, and reliable async execution in Node.js/TypeScript applications.

Quality

66%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/bullmq-specialist/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

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 body delivers genuinely concrete, BullMQ-specific guidance with real code and a useful validation-check catalog, and it honestly flags its snippets as fragments. Its weaknesses are redundancy across metadata-style sections, absent code fences, no validate-then-proceed workflow for batch job operations, and a monolithic single-file layout with no progressive disclosure.

Suggestions

Wrap all code snippets in ```typescript fences so they render as code rather than plain markdown text.

Add an operational workflow with explicit validation checkpoints for batch job operations, e.g. 'add queue -> verify maxRetriesPerRequest: null and failed/stalled handlers present -> deploy worker with SIGTERM handling', reusing the Validation Checks as a run-through checklist.

De-duplicate the Capabilities/Tooling-Patterns and Scope/Delegation-Triggers sections, and move the Validation Checks catalog and collaboration stack workflows into reference files (e.g. references/validation.md, references/collaboration.md) so SKILL.md stays a lean overview.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly compact lists and code with little explanation of concepts Claude already knows, but there is notable duplication: the 'Capabilities' list repeats 'Tooling -> Patterns', 'Scope' repeats the 'Delegation Triggers' mapping, two sections are titled 'Patterns', and the four collaboration stack workflows add padding that could be condensed. This fits 'mostly efficient but could be tightened' better than the trimmed anchor 4.

3 / 5

Actionability

Concrete TypeScript snippets cover queue setup, delayed/repeatable jobs, FlowProducer dependencies, graceful shutdown, and Bull Board. They are fragments (undefined queue/app/worker, no ``` code fences) rather than copy-paste ready, but the body explicitly acknowledges and justifies this ('The snippets are fragments, not production-ready code: supply sendEmail/app/queue definitions...'), placing it above anchor 3's incomplete pseudocode but below anchor 5's fully executable examples.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Operational sequences exist (graceful shutdown, workflow step lists) but there is no integrated do-then-validate workflow with checkpoints or error-recovery loops. The 'Validation Checks' section is a lint-rule catalog with severities and messages rather than a sequenced validate->fix->retry process, and since background job processing is a batch operation the rubric caps workflow clarity at 3.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist (references/, scripts/, assets/ are all absent), so everything - code patterns, a 10-item validation catalog, collaboration stacks, tooling lists - is inlined in a single ~390-line file. Section headers provide reasonable structure, but content that clearly belongs in separate reference files is inline with no one-level-deep navigation, matching anchor 3 rather than the well-split anchor 4.

3 / 5

Total

13

/

20

Passed

Description

61%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 concise and domain-specific with good natural keywords, but it reads as a role statement rather than a capability-plus-trigger description. It lacks any 'Use when...' guidance, which caps completeness, and lists only 1-2 generic actions rather than concrete capabilities.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause such as 'Use when the user mentions BullMQ, job queues, Redis queues, background jobs, delayed/repeatable jobs, or worker processes.'

Replace generic actions with concrete capabilities, e.g. 'Set up queues and workers, configure retries with exponential backoff, schedule delayed and repeatable jobs, build job flows with parent-child dependencies, and implement graceful shutdown.'

Include common synonyms users would say ('task queue', 'scheduled jobs', 'cron jobs', 'worker') to broaden trigger coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain clearly ('BullMQ expert for Redis-backed job queues') and lists actions ('background processing, and reliable async execution in Node.js/TypeScript applications'), but these are only 1-2 generic actions rather than the several concrete capabilities (queue setup, worker concurrency, retries/backoff, job flows) that higher anchors require.

3 / 5

Completeness

It clearly answers 'what' (BullMQ expert for Redis-backed job queues and background processing) but contains no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, which per the judging guidelines caps completeness at 3. It is not a 2 because the 'what' is clear, not vague.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Natural user terms are well covered: 'BullMQ', 'Redis-backed job queues', 'background processing', 'async execution', 'Node.js/TypeScript'. A few common variations are missing ('worker', 'task queue', 'delayed/scheduled jobs'), so it falls just short of the comprehensive-synonym anchor 5 but clearly above anchor 3's 'some relevant keywords'.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Naming the specific library BullMQ with Redis and Node.js/TypeScript gives it a clear niche with minimal conflict risk, but without explicit trigger phrases it could still overlap with adjacent queue skills (e.g. generic background-job or serverless-queue skills), fitting anchor 4 ('mostly distinct; minor overlap risk with closely related skills') better than anchor 5.

4 / 5

Total

14

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

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

CriteriaDescriptionResult

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/bullmq-specialist/SKILL.md

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.