c4-component

Expert C4 Component-level documentation specialist. Synthesizes C4 Code-level documentation into Component-level architecture, defining component boundaries, interfaces, and relationships.

Quality

20%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

Pending

No eval scenarios have been run

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/c4-component/SKILL.md

Quality

Discovery

32%

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 identifies a clear domain (C4 Component-level documentation) and mentions the transformation from Code-level to Component-level, which provides some specificity. However, it lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause, which is critical for skill selection, and the actions described are somewhat abstract rather than listing concrete deliverables. The description reads more like a role title than actionable selection guidance.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with trigger scenarios, e.g., 'Use when the user asks to create C4 Component diagrams, aggregate code-level details into component views, or define component boundaries and interfaces.'

Include natural user-facing trigger terms such as 'C4 model', 'C4 diagram', 'component diagram', 'architecture documentation', 'system decomposition'.

List more concrete output actions, e.g., 'Generates C4 Component diagrams, defines component APIs and dependencies, maps code-level elements to component groupings.'

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain (C4 Component-level documentation) and some actions ('synthesizes', 'defining component boundaries, interfaces, and relationships'), but doesn't list multiple concrete discrete actions like generating diagrams, producing specific output formats, or validating architecture.	2 / 3
Completeness	Describes what it does (synthesizes C4 Code-level docs into Component-level architecture) but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. Per rubric guidelines, missing 'Use when' caps completeness at 2, and the 'what' is also only moderately clear, so this scores a 1.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Includes relevant terms like 'C4', 'Component-level', 'Code-level', 'architecture', 'component boundaries', and 'interfaces', but misses common user variations like 'C4 model', 'C4 diagram', 'architecture documentation', or 'component diagram'. The terminology is somewhat specialized.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The C4 Component-level focus is fairly specific and distinguishes it from generic documentation skills, but it could easily overlap with other C4-level documentation skills (e.g., a C4 Context-level or Container-level skill) without clearer differentiation of when to use this one versus others in the C4 hierarchy.	2 / 3
	Total	7 / 12 Passed

Implementation

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

This skill is essentially an unfilled template with placeholder brackets throughout, providing no concrete, actionable guidance for synthesizing C4 code-level documentation into component-level architecture. It explains concepts Claude already knows, lacks any executable workflow or validation steps, and the generic instructions could apply to virtually any task. The Mermaid diagram template is the most useful element but is still generic.

Suggestions

Replace all placeholder brackets with a concrete, worked example showing how to synthesize actual code-level files into a component document, demonstrating the full process end-to-end.

Add a clear, numbered workflow with validation checkpoints: e.g., 1) Read all c4-code-*.md files, 2) Identify logical groupings, 3) Validate boundaries against coupling metrics, 4) Generate component doc, 5) Verify all code files are accounted for.

Remove explanatory content Claude already knows (what C4 components are, what interfaces are, basic Mermaid syntax) and focus on the specific synthesis heuristics and decision criteria that are unique to this task.

Either provide the referenced 'resources/implementation-playbook.md' bundle file or remove the reference, and add concrete decision rules for component boundary identification inline.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The skill is a template full of placeholders ([Component Name], [Description], etc.) rather than actionable content. It explains concepts Claude already understands (what C4 components are, what interfaces are) and includes verbose boilerplate sections like 'Use this skill when' / 'Do not use this skill when' that add little value. The 'Key Principles' section restates basic C4 model knowledge.	1 / 3
Actionability	The content is entirely template-based with placeholder brackets throughout — nothing is executable or copy-paste ready. There are no concrete commands, no real code examples, and no specific steps Claude could follow to actually synthesize code-level docs into component-level architecture. The 'Instructions' section is four generic bullet points that could apply to any skill.	1 / 3
Workflow Clarity	There is no clear multi-step workflow for the core task of synthesizing C4 code-level documentation into component-level architecture. The 'Instructions' section lists four vague bullets with no sequencing, no validation checkpoints, and no feedback loops. The 'Example Interactions' section lists prompts but not how to execute them.	1 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	There is a reference to 'resources/implementation-playbook.md' and mentions of c4-code-*.md files, suggesting some structure. However, no bundle files exist to support these references, and the skill itself is a monolithic template that mixes overview, templates, examples, and guidelines all in one file without clear navigation hierarchy.	2 / 3
	Total	5 / 12 Passed

Validation

90%

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 — 10 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

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

	Total	10 / 11 Passed

Repository: sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills
Commit: 1930a07

Reviewed: about 2 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.