CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

server-management

Server management principles and decision-making. Process management, monitoring strategy, and scaling decisions. Teaches thinking, not commands.

51

Quality

57%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.agents/skills/server-management/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

65%

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

The skill is commendably concise and well-organized as a principles reference, but its deliberate "thinking, not commands" stance leaves it short on executable guidance, concrete examples, and validation checkpoints. It works as a decision aid more than an operational playbook.

Suggestions

Add at least one concrete executable example per major area (e.g. a sample `pm2 start`/`ecosystem.config.js` snippet, a health-check endpoint, or a logrotate config) to raise actionability.

Insert validation/verification checkpoints into the troubleshooting sequence (e.g. "confirm process is up with `pm2 status` before checking logs") to lift workflow clarity.

Move detailed tool-specific setup into a references file (e.g. references/pm2-setup.md, references/monitoring.md) linked from each section to enable progressive disclosure while keeping SKILL.md a lean overview.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is lean and table-driven with almost no prose padding, assuming Claude's competence and earning every token; it never explains concepts Claude already knows, matching the level-3 anchor.

3 / 3

Actionability

Tool-selection and decision tables give specific named tools (PM2, systemd, Grafana, Sentry) and clear mappings, but there is no executable command, config snippet, or concrete example — it describes decisions rather than instructing execution, so guidance is actionable but incomplete.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

Section 7 provides a clear 5-step troubleshooting sequence, but the rest is reference material with no validation checkpoints or feedback loops, and the sequence itself lacks verification between steps.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

Content is well-organized into eight numbered sections with tables, but everything is inline in a single ~155-line file with no external references or navigation to deeper material, so it is structured yet monolithic.

2 / 3

Total

9

/

12

Passed

Description

50%

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 communicates a clear domain and philosophy ("Teaches thinking, not commands") but stays at an abstract principles level and lacks an explicit use-trigger clause within the description field itself. It is competent but middling across all dimensions.

Suggestions

Add an explicit "Use when..." clause directly inside the description (e.g. "Use when managing production servers, configuring PM2/systemd, or planning scaling").

Replace abstract nouns with a couple of concrete actions or named tools (e.g. "configure PM2 clustering, set up health checks, choose horizontal vs vertical scaling") to lift specificity.

Add distinctive trigger terms like "PM2", "systemd", "health checks", or "log rotation" to reduce overlap with generic DevOps skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names the domain and three action areas ("Process management, monitoring strategy, and scaling decisions") but these are abstract nouns/principles rather than concrete executable actions, matching the level-2 anchor.

2 / 3

Completeness

The description answers "what" clearly but contains no "Use when..." clause; per the guidelines, a missing explicit trigger clause caps completeness at 2 even though a when_to_use field exists separately.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Includes relevant natural terms ("Server management", "monitoring", "scaling") a user would say, but omits common variations and tool names like PM2/systemd that appear only in the separate when_to_use field.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Server management" is a recognizable niche, but process management, monitoring, and scaling overlap broadly with general DevOps/SRE skills, so it could still collide with similar skills.

2 / 3

Total

8

/

12

Passed

Validation

87%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation14 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

allowed_tools_field

'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s)

Warning

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

14

/

16

Passed

Repository
vudovn/ag-kit
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.