CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

modular-design-principles

Technology-agnostic guidance for modular systems: bounded contexts, clear boundaries, composability, state isolation, explicit contracts, failure containment, scaffolding workflows, split/merge criteria, sub-units inside a context, and compliance review signals. Use when designing or reviewing module structure, service boundaries, package layout, cross-cutting dependencies, "how should we split this?", modularity assessments, coupling between domains, greenfield context design, or architecture discussions without assuming a specific framework, language, or repository layout. Do NOT use for executing the full Patterns 1–5 repo decomposition pipeline or per-pattern inventories (use modular-decomposition), phased extraction roadmaps as the main deliverable (use decomposition-planning-roadmap), or end-to-end legacy migration strategy (use legacy-migration-planner).

Quality

91%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

78%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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

A well-organized, dense reference skill that uses tables and checklists effectively and practices clean one-level progressive disclosure. Main room for improvement is trimming restatements of well-known architecture concepts and surfacing a worked example inline.

Suggestions

Trim or condense restatements of concepts Claude already knows (e.g., the layered mental model and ubiquitous-language explanations) to tighten the body further.

Inline one short worked example of a module boundary or contract in SKILL.md so the guidance is immediately actionable without loading references/principles.md.

Add an explicit validate-then-fix feedback loop to the architecture compliance pass (e.g., 'confirm signal with domain owner before reporting as P0/P1') to strengthen workflow_clarity.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Mostly an efficient, dense reference of tables and one-line intents rather than padded prose, but it restates architecture concepts Claude already knows (bounded contexts, ubiquitous language, sagas/outbox) and runs ~174 lines, so it is not perfectly lean.

4 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, specific guidance for an instruction-only skill — an 8-step bounded-context workflow, a six-criteria split/merge test, named compliance signals, and P0/P1/P2 severity tiers — but worked examples are deferred to references/principles.md, leaving minor gaps in SKILL.md itself.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The bounded-context workflow is a clear numbered sequence with an explicit 'Isolation check' checkpoint (step 7) and a closing quick checklist; no destructive/batch cap applies, though an explicit error-recovery feedback loop is absent.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

A 'What to load' table and inline references clearly signal references/principles.md, which is one level deep (verified: no nested references inside it), so overview and depth are appropriately split with easy navigation.

5 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Description

100%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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 strong, comprehensive description that clearly states what the skill covers, gives concrete natural-language trigger phrases, and disambiguates from neighboring skills with explicit exclusions. Third-person voice is maintained throughout.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Enumerates many concrete capabilities — 'bounded contexts, clear boundaries, composability, state isolation, explicit contracts, failure containment, scaffolding workflows, split/merge criteria, sub-units inside a context, and compliance review signals' — giving comprehensive, specific coverage rather than vague abstraction.

5 / 5

Completeness

Explicitly answers both 'what' (the enumerated capability list) and 'when' ('Use when designing or reviewing module structure...'), plus negative triggers ('Do NOT use for...'), satisfying the top anchor with concrete trigger phrases.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Includes natural phrases users would actually say — 'service boundaries', 'package layout', 'how should we split this?', 'modularity assessments', 'coupling between domains', 'architecture discussions' — with synonyms across the trigger list.

5 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Clear niche (technology-agnostic modular design) with explicit 'Do NOT use for' disambiguation against modular-decomposition, decomposition-planning-roadmap, and legacy-migration-planner, minimizing wrong-skill conflicts.

5 / 5

Total

20

/

20

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

tech-leads-club/agent-skills

Path

packages/skills-catalog/skills/(architecture)/modular-design-principles/SKILL.md

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.