c4-container

Expert C4 Container-level documentation specialist.

Quality

14%

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-container/SKILL.md

Quality

Discovery

22%

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

This description is far too terse and vague to be effective. It relies on buzzwords ('Expert', 'specialist') without describing any concrete actions the skill performs, and completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause to guide skill selection. The only redeeming quality is the mention of 'C4 Container-level' which provides some domain specificity.

Suggestions

Replace vague 'specialist' label with concrete actions, e.g., 'Generates C4 Container-level architecture diagrams, documents system containers and their interactions, creates PlantUML or Structurizr DSL representations.'

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about C4 model container diagrams, system architecture documentation, or container-level design views.'

Include natural trigger terms users would say, such as 'architecture diagram', 'container diagram', 'C4 model', 'system design', 'PlantUML', 'Structurizr'.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description uses vague language with no concrete actions listed. 'Expert' and 'specialist' are buzzwords that don't describe what the skill actually does (e.g., generate diagrams, write documentation, create container views).	1 / 3
Completeness	The 'what' is extremely vague ('documentation specialist' says almost nothing about concrete capabilities), and there is no 'when' clause or explicit trigger guidance whatsoever.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	It includes 'C4' and 'Container-level' which are relevant domain terms a user might mention, but misses natural variations like 'architecture diagram', 'system design', 'container diagram', '.puml', or 'PlantUML'.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	'C4 Container-level' provides some niche specificity that distinguishes it from generic documentation skills, but 'documentation specialist' is broad enough to overlap with other documentation-related skills.	2 / 3
	Total	6 / 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 a documentation template with placeholder brackets rather than actionable guidance for Claude. It explains concepts Claude already knows (C4 model basics, OpenAPI structure, container types) and provides no concrete workflow for actually producing container-level documentation. The content would benefit from being rewritten as a concise, step-by-step process with real examples instead of fill-in-the-blank templates.

Suggestions

Replace placeholder templates with a concrete, step-by-step workflow: e.g., '1. Identify deployment units from code/config → 2. Map components to containers → 3. Document interfaces → 4. Validate diagram completeness'

Remove boilerplate that Claude already knows (OpenAPI template structure, what REST/GraphQL are, basic C4 definitions) and focus only on project-specific conventions or non-obvious decisions

Add a concrete worked example showing a real container documentation output rather than just listing what the output should contain

Add validation checkpoints (e.g., 'Verify each container has at least one interface documented', 'Confirm all inter-container relationships appear in the Mermaid diagram')

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The content is heavily templated with placeholder brackets ([Container Name], [Description], etc.) that provide no actionable value. It explains concepts Claude already knows (what REST/GraphQL are, what containers are) and includes verbose sections like 'Key Principles' and 'Key Distinctions' that pad the content significantly. The OpenAPI template is boilerplate that Claude can generate on demand.	1 / 3
Actionability	Almost entirely placeholder templates rather than executable guidance. The instructions section is vague ('Clarify goals, constraints, and required inputs', 'Apply relevant best practices'). No concrete, copy-paste-ready code or commands—just fill-in-the-blank templates that describe structure rather than instruct specific actions.	1 / 3
Workflow Clarity	There is no clear multi-step workflow or sequenced process. The skill describes what output should look like but never explains how to get there step by step. No validation checkpoints, no feedback loops, no error recovery guidance. The 'Instructions' section has four bullet points that are too abstract to constitute a workflow.	1 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	There is a reference to 'resources/implementation-playbook.md' and mentions of component documentation files (c4-component-name.md), showing some attempt at progressive disclosure. However, no bundle files exist to support these references, and the main file itself is a monolithic wall of templates that could be better organized with content split into separate reference files.	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.