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

61%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

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

Quality

Content

61%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 provides concrete, largely copy-paste-ready agent dispatch instructions in a clearly sequenced 12-phase workflow, but it carries an unnecessary meta-explanation block and lacks explicit inter-phase validation checkpoints for a deployment-heavy workflow. Progressive disclosure is good internally but would benefit from offloading phase detail to reference files.

Suggestions

Remove the '[Extended thinking: ...]' paragraph and trim redundant 'Context:' lines that restate earlier phases to tighten token use.

Add explicit inter-phase validation checkpoints (e.g., 'Only proceed to Phase 2 when the requirements document is approved') to satisfy the destructive/batch validation requirement.

Move the verbose per-phase prompt templates into reference files (e.g., PHASES.md) and keep SKILL.md as an overview with one-level-deep links.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly efficient and structured, but the '[Extended thinking: ...]' paragraph and repeatedly redundant 'Context:' lines that restate prior phases add unnecessary explanation that could be tightened, matching 'mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation'.	3 / 5
Actionability	Each phase gives a concrete Task-tool invocation with an explicit subagent_type and a full prompt template that is largely copy-paste ready, with only minor gaps from placeholder assembly like '[include business analysis from step 1]'.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The 12 phases are clearly sequenced with expected outputs and a Safety/Rollback section, but validation is section-level rather than explicit inter-phase checkpoints; given this workflow involves production deployment and data migrations, the missing per-phase validation caps the score at 3.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The single SKILL.md is well-organized with clear section headers and no nested references, but substantial per-phase dispatch detail is all inlined rather than offloaded to bundle files (none exist), leaving a minor organization gap.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 20 Passed

Description

62%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 clearly answers both what and when in third-person voice with a reasonably distinct scope, but its action vocabulary is abstract and its trigger terms lack natural synonyms. It sits solidly in the middle of the scale with room to add concrete actions and more natural phrasing.

Suggestions

Replace the abstract verb 'orchestrate' with several concrete actions the skill performs (e.g., 'define requirements, design architecture, implement services, run tests, configure rollout').

Add natural trigger phrases and synonyms a user would actually say, such as 'roll out a backend feature' or 'coordinate a multi-service feature release'.

Expand the 'when' clause with a few concrete trigger variations to push completeness toward the anchor-5 example.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	It names the domain ('backend feature development') and the end-to-end span ('from requirements to deployment') but relies on a single abstract verb ('orchestrate') rather than listing several concrete actions, matching the 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions' anchor and falling short of the multi-action anchor 4.	3 / 5
Completeness	Both 'what' (orchestrate end-to-end backend feature development) and 'when' (use when coordinating multi-phase feature delivery across teams and services) are explicitly answered with a concrete trigger, though the when clause is narrower than the multi-trigger anchor-5 example.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Relevant keywords like 'backend feature development' and 'multi-phase feature delivery across teams and services' are present but lean formal/conceptual and lack common natural synonyms, fitting 'some relevant keywords but missing common variations'.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The backend, multi-phase, cross-team/services scope is a fairly distinct niche with only minor overlap risk against closely related project-management or deployment skills.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 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/antigravity-awesome-skills
Path: skills/backend-development-feature-development/SKILL.md
Commit: b6ceca3

Reviewed: 4 days 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.