aws-advisor
Expert AWS Cloud Advisor for architecture design, security review, and implementation guidance. Leverages AWS MCP tools for accurate, documentation-backed answers. Use when user asks about AWS architecture, security, service selection, migrations, troubleshooting, or learning AWS. Triggers on AWS, Lambda, S3, EC2, ECS, EKS, DynamoDB, RDS, CloudFormation, CDK, Terraform, Serverless, SAM, IAM, VPC, API Gateway, or any AWS service. Do NOT use for non-AWS cloud providers or general infrastructure without AWS context.
89
86%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Quality
Discovery
100%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 is an excellent skill description that covers all key dimensions well. It provides specific capabilities, comprehensive trigger terms spanning many AWS services, explicit 'Use when' and 'Do NOT use' clauses, and a clear AWS-specific niche that distinguishes it from other cloud or infrastructure skills. The description is concise yet thorough, using proper third-person voice throughout.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'architecture design, security review, and implementation guidance' along with specific use cases like 'migrations, troubleshooting, or learning AWS'. Also mentions leveraging AWS MCP tools for documentation-backed answers. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (architecture design, security review, implementation guidance with MCP tools) and 'when' (explicit 'Use when' clause with triggers, plus a 'Do NOT use' exclusion clause for non-AWS contexts). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural trigger terms users would say: 'AWS, Lambda, S3, EC2, ECS, EKS, DynamoDB, RDS, CloudFormation, CDK, Terraform, Serverless, SAM, IAM, VPC, API Gateway' plus broader terms like 'architecture', 'security', 'migrations', 'troubleshooting'. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive with a clear AWS-specific niche. The explicit exclusion clause ('Do NOT use for non-AWS cloud providers or general infrastructure without AWS context') further reduces conflict risk with other cloud or infrastructure skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
72%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-structured AWS advisor skill with strong actionability through concrete tool references, script paths, and code examples. Its main weaknesses are some verbosity in the IaC examples section (which covers basic boilerplate) and workflows that lack explicit validation/error-recovery checkpoints. The progressive disclosure pattern with reference files and conditional loading is a notable strength.
Suggestions
Add validation checkpoints to workflows, e.g., after running scripts/security_review.py, specify how to verify the output is complete and what to do if it fails.
Trim or remove the IaC quick reference code examples—Claude knows basic Lambda syntax for Terraform/CDK/SAM/Serverless Framework. Instead, just note which tool to use and remind to search for latest syntax.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Generally efficient with good use of tables, but includes some unnecessary content like the IaC code examples section which is fairly lengthy and covers basic boilerplate Claude already knows. The 'Core Principles' and 'Response Style' sections also contain generic advice that doesn't add much unique value. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides concrete MCP tool names with specific use cases, executable IaC code examples across multiple frameworks, specific script paths to run, and clear topic selection guidance for searches. The guidance is specific and directly usable. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Workflows are listed with clear sequences (Standard Question Flow, Architecture Review, Security Review), but they lack explicit validation checkpoints and error recovery steps. For example, the Architecture Review flow references scripts but doesn't specify what to do if validation fails or how to verify outputs. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Excellent structure with a clear overview, well-organized tables for reference files loaded on-demand, scripts separated from main content, and one-level-deep references to mcp-guide.md, decision-trees.md, and checklists.md with clear 'Load When' conditions. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- Repository
- tech-leads-club/agent-skills
- Commit
906a57d
- Reviewed
Table of Contents
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.