cqrs-implementation

Implement Command Query Responsibility Segregation for scalable architectures. Use when separating read and write models, optimizing query performance, or building event-sourced systems.

Quality

67%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugins/backend-development/skills/cqrs-implementation/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

51%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.

The body is well-structured and uses progressive disclosure effectively, but it is concept-heavy rather than executable: it lacks a sequenced implementation workflow with validation checkpoints and provides no concrete code in the overview. The ASCII diagram also spends tokens restating a well-known architecture.

Suggestions

Add a short numbered implementation workflow (e.g., define commands → command handlers → events → projectors → read models) with an explicit validation checkpoint (e.g., verify event schema/handler invariants before projecting) to raise workflow_clarity.

Include at least one small executable snippet inline (a command class, handler, or projector skeleton) so the overview is actionable without forcing a jump to references.

Trim or shrink the ASCII CQRS data-flow diagram, since it depicts a standard architecture Claude already knows; keep only the component-responsibility table.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly efficient with terse best-practice one-liners, but the large ASCII architecture diagram spends many tokens explaining standard CQRS data flow that Claude already knows.	3 / 5
Actionability	Concrete design directives appear ("Validate in command handlers", "Denormalize read models", "Version your events") and a component table is provided, but there is no executable code or specific implementation steps in the body — templates are deferred to references.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The content is organized into topical sections but presents no sequenced implementation workflow (e.g., define commands → handlers → events → projectors → read models) and no validation checkpoints, leaving the multi-step process unordered.	2 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	SKILL.md serves as a concise overview with a clearly signaled, one-level-deep reference to the existing references/details.md for templates and worked examples, matching the intended navigation pattern.	5 / 5
	Total	13 / 20 Passed

Description

83%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, well-structured description that clearly states the capability and provides explicit, concrete use-when triggers in third-person voice. It is specific and distinct with only minor gaps in keyword synonym coverage and overlap risk.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description lists several concrete activities ("separating read and write models, optimizing query performance, or building event-sourced systems") beyond naming the domain, with only minor coverage gaps.	4 / 5
Completeness	It explicitly answers both what ("Implement Command Query Responsibility Segregation for scalable architectures") and when ("Use when separating read and write models, optimizing query performance, or building event-sourced systems") with concrete trigger phrases.	5 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Natural terms a user would say are present ("read and write models", "query performance", "event-sourced systems", "CQRS"), with good though not exhaustive synonym coverage.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	CQRS is a clear niche with distinct triggers, though there is minor overlap risk with a generic event-sourcing or architecture skill.	4 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: wshobson/agents
Path: plugins/backend-development/skills/cqrs-implementation/SKILL.md
Commit: d6837ae

Reviewed: about 12 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.