c4-context

Expert C4 Context-level documentation specialist. Creates high-level system context diagrams, documents personas, user journeys, system features, and external dependencies.

Quality

62%

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/c4-context/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

53%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 a usable C4 context documentation template with concrete Mermaid syntax, but it is diluted by generic boilerplate instructions and weakened by a dangling reference to a nonexistent playbook file. Workflow guidance lacks explicit validation checkpoints, and formatting defects (stray code fence, duplicated field lists) reduce efficiency. Fixing the broken reference and replacing filler instructions with concrete steps would lift most dimensions.

Suggestions

Fix the broken progressive-disclosure reference: either create resources/implementation-playbook.md with the detailed examples and walkthrough, or remove the pointer — currently it directs the reader to a file that does not exist in the bundle.

Replace the abstract Instructions bullets ("Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes") with a concrete sequenced workflow, e.g. gather system inputs → identify personas → map features and journeys → document external systems → render the Mermaid diagram → verify all template fields and diagram relations are populated.

Delete the boilerplate "Use this skill when" / "Do not use this skill when" sections (they restate the description tautologically), deduplicate the template field list against "Output Examples", and remove the stray unmatched ``` fence at line 87.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The core template and Mermaid guidance earn their tokens, but several sections are boilerplate that assumes Claude's ignorance: "Clarify goals, constraints, and required inputs", "Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes", and tautological "Use/Do not use this skill when" sections ("The task is unrelated to c4 context level: system context"). The template fields are also repeated nearly verbatim in "Output Examples". Not 4 because these padded sections are more than minor trimmings.	3 / 5
Actionability	Provides a complete, executable Mermaid C4Context code block, a concrete output template with named fields (Type, Goals, Integration Type), and specific key principles and distinctions versus sibling agents. Not 5 because there is no worked example of filled-in documentation, the Instructions bullets are abstract, and a stray unmatched code fence at line 87 breaks the template section.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The template's section ordering implies a coherent production sequence (overview → personas → features → journeys → external systems → diagram), but the Instructions offer only vague steps ("Apply relevant best practices and validate outcomes") with no explicit validation checkpoints. Not 4 because no verification step is concretely defined anywhere; not 2 because the output structure does define a clear order.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The body's only external reference, "If detailed examples are required, open resources/implementation-playbook.md", points to a file that does not exist anywhere in the bundle (no references/, scripts/, or assets/ directories), so navigation to detail is broken. All content is inlined in a single ~140-line file. Not 3 because a clearly signaled but dead reference is worse than an unclearly signaled one — the reader follows it and finds nothing.	2 / 5
	Total	12 / 20 Passed

Description

71%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.

A specific, well-scoped description with concrete actions and good niche distinctiveness. Its main weakness is the complete absence of "when to use" trigger guidance, which both caps completeness and limits trigger-term utility. Adding an explicit "Use when..." clause with natural trigger phrases would raise it substantially.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. "Use when creating C4 system context documentation, mapping personas and user journeys, or diagramming external system dependencies at the context level."

Include natural synonyms and variations users might say, such as "C4 model", "software architecture overview", or "system context diagram", to broaden trigger-term coverage.

Trim the "Expert ... specialist" framing, which adds padding without information, and spend those tokens on the when-to-use clause instead.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	"Creates high-level system context diagrams, documents personas, user journeys, system features, and external dependencies" lists multiple concrete actions that comprehensively cover the C4 context-level domain, matching the skill's actual sections. Only trivial padding ("Expert ... specialist") keeps it from being flawless, but coverage is comprehensive rather than having minor gaps.	5 / 5
Completeness	The description clearly answers "what" (creates context diagrams, documents personas, journeys, features, dependencies) but contains no "Use when..." clause or equivalent explicit trigger guidance, capping completeness at 3 per the judging guidelines. Not 4 because the "when" is entirely absent, not merely imprecise.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Natural phrases like "C4 Context-level", "system context diagrams", "personas", and "user journeys" are terms users of this methodology would say, but common variations such as "C4 model", "software architecture", or plain "context diagram" are missing. Good coverage, a few natural synonyms absent.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	"C4 Context-level" carves out a clear niche distinct from generic documentation skills, and "Context-level" differentiates it from sibling container/component/code C4 skills. Minor overlap risk remains because sibling C4 skills share trigger vocabulary like "C4" and "diagram".	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 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/c4-context/SKILL.md
Commit: 7b534bc

Reviewed: 22 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.