c4-architecture-c4-architecture

Name: c4-architecture-c4-architecture
Rating: 66 (1 reviews)
Author: sickn33

tessl i github:sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills --skill c4-architecture-c4-architecture

github.com/sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills

Generate comprehensive C4 architecture documentation for an existing repository/codebase using a bottom-up analysis approach.

Review Score

66%

Validation Score

13/16

Implementation Score

77%

Activation Score

33%

SKILL.md

Review

Evals

Generated

13 days ago

Warnings & errors only

Criteria	Score
description_trigger_hint	Description may be missing an explicit 'when to use' trigger hint (e.g., 'Use when...')
metadata_version	'metadata' field is not a dictionary
license_field	'license' field is missing

Overall Assessment

This is a comprehensive, well-structured workflow skill with excellent actionability and clear multi-phase sequencing. The main weaknesses are verbosity (extended thinking block, explanations of C4 model basics) and the monolithic nature of the content that could benefit from splitting detailed agent prompts into separate reference files.

Suggestions

Remove the extended thinking block and C4 model explanations - Claude already knows what C4 is and the official link suffices
Move the detailed agent prompts (the large prompt blocks in each phase) to separate reference files like 'prompts/code-agent-prompt.md' and reference them inline
Remove the generic 'Use this skill when' and 'Do not use this skill when' sections as they add no value beyond the title

Dimension	Score	Reasoning
Conciseness	2/3	The skill contains some unnecessary verbosity, including an extended thinking block that adds no value, explanations of what C4 is (Claude knows this), and repetitive structure descriptions. However, the core workflow steps are reasonably efficient.
Actionability	3/3	The skill provides highly concrete, actionable guidance with specific prompts for each phase, exact file naming conventions, directory structures, and detailed output expectations. The Task tool invocations with subagent_type specifications are copy-paste ready.
Workflow Clarity	3/3	The four-phase workflow is clearly sequenced with explicit dependencies (each phase builds on previous), success criteria serve as validation checkpoints, and the bottom-up processing order is well-defined. The coordination notes reinforce the workflow logic.
Progressive Disclosure	2/3	The skill references an external file (resources/implementation-playbook.md) appropriately, but the main content is quite long and could benefit from splitting detailed prompts into separate files. The output structure section is well-organized but the inline prompts are verbose.

Overall Assessment

The description identifies a specific methodology (C4) and approach (bottom-up analysis) which provides some clarity, but it lacks explicit trigger guidance and comprehensive action verbs. The absence of a 'Use when...' clause significantly weakens its utility for skill selection among many options.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms like 'C4 diagrams', 'architecture documentation', 'document codebase structure', 'system context diagram', 'container diagram'
List specific concrete actions such as 'analyze code structure, generate context diagrams, create container and component views, produce deployment diagrams'
Include file type triggers like '.md architecture files', 'PlantUML', or 'Mermaid diagrams' if applicable to increase distinctiveness

Dimension	Score	Reasoning
Specificity	2/3	Names the domain (C4 architecture documentation) and mentions a specific approach (bottom-up analysis), but doesn't list concrete actions like 'create context diagrams, generate container views, map component relationships'.
Completeness	1/3	Describes what it does (generate C4 documentation) but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill.
Trigger Term Quality	2/3	Includes some relevant terms like 'C4', 'architecture documentation', 'codebase', and 'repository', but misses common variations users might say like 'system diagrams', 'architecture diagrams', 'code structure', or 'document my code'.
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	2/3	The C4 methodology reference provides some distinctiveness from generic documentation skills, but 'architecture documentation' could overlap with other documentation or diagramming skills without clearer boundaries.