component-common-domain-detection

Finds duplicate business logic spread across multiple components and suggests consolidation. Use when asking "where is this logic duplicated?", "find common code between services", "what can be consolidated?", "detect shared domain logic", or analyzing component overlap before refactoring. Do NOT use for code-level duplication detection (use linters) or dependency analysis (use coupling-analysis).

Quality

—

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

—

No eval scenarios have been run

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Quality

Content

77%

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

The body is highly actionable with executable detection code and a clear phased workflow, but it is a long, repetitive monolith that would benefit from splitting detail into reference files and trimming redundant sections.

Suggestions

Move the fitness-function code, per-language implementation notes, and detailed report templates into separate reference files (e.g. references/fitness-functions.md) and link to them one level deep from SKILL.md to improve progressive disclosure.

Consolidate the redundant 'Usage Examples', 'Step-by-Step Process', 'Analysis Process' phases, and 'Analysis Checklist' into a single phased workflow to reduce repetition and token cost.

Trim concept explanations Claude already knows (e.g., the domain-vs-infrastructure framing and shared-service-vs-library trade-offs) to the minimum needed to scope the analysis.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The ~600-line body is heavily padded with redundancy — the 'Usage Examples', five-phase 'Analysis Process', three 'Output Format' variants, and a 'Common Patterns to Look For' section overlap, and the 'Analysis Checklist' re-lists the same five phases — so it is mostly useful but could be tightened considerably; it does not reach the lean level-3 anchor.	2 / 3
Actionability	Provides executable, complete JavaScript (extractLeafNode, groupByLeafNode, findSharedClasses) plus fitness-function checks, concrete report formats, and a step-by-step process — copy-paste ready guidance matching the level-3 anchor.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	A clear five-phase sequence (Identify patterns → Detect shared classes → Analyze similarity → Assess coupling → Recommend) with an analysis checklist; because this is read-only analysis rather than destructive or batch operations, the absence of a validate-fix-retry loop does not cap the score, and sequencing with a coupling checkpoint before recommendation meets the level-3 anchor.	3 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	No bundle files exist (references/, scripts/, assets/ absent) and the entire ~600-line body is a monolithic single file with everything inline; sections provide some structure, but content that should be split (fitness functions, per-language implementation notes, detailed report templates) is not separated into one-level-deep references, so it falls below the level-3 anchor.	2 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Description

90%

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

A well-crafted description with strong trigger phrasing, explicit when-guidance, and clear disambiguation from adjacent skills. Its only weakness is a slightly limited set of concrete actions, keeping specificity below the top anchor.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Quotes 'Finds duplicate business logic spread across multiple components and suggests consolidation' — it names the domain and two concrete actions (find, suggest), but the action list is limited rather than a comprehensive set of multiple specific actions, so it sits below the level-3 anchor and above the vague level-1 anchor.	2 / 3
Completeness	Clearly answers both what ('Finds duplicate business logic... suggests consolidation') and when with explicit triggers ('Use when asking...') plus negative guidance, matching the level-3 anchor.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Quotes natural phrasings users would say — 'where is this logic duplicated?', 'find common code between services', 'what can be consolidated?', 'detect shared domain logic' — giving good coverage of likely user language.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Clear niche with explicit exclusions — 'Do NOT use for code-level duplication detection (use linters) or dependency analysis (use coupling-analysis)' — making it unlikely to trigger for the wrong skill.	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 12 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
skill_md_line_count	SKILL.md is long (607 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking	Warning

	Total	15 / 16 Passed

Repository: tech-leads-club/agent-skills
Commit: 9026164

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.