microservices-patterns
Design microservices architectures with service boundaries, event-driven communication, and resilience patterns. Use when building distributed systems, decomposing monoliths, or implementing microservices.
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:wshobson/agents --skill microservices-patternsOverall
score
81%
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillEvaluation — 98%
↑ 1.53xAgent success when using this skill
Validation for skill structure
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 a well-crafted skill description that follows best practices. It uses third person voice, lists specific architectural capabilities, includes an explicit 'Use when' clause with natural trigger terms, and carves out a distinct niche in the microservices/distributed systems domain.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'Design microservices architectures with service boundaries, event-driven communication, and resilience patterns' covers distinct architectural concerns and patterns. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what (design microservices architectures with specific patterns) AND when (building distributed systems, decomposing monoliths, implementing microservices) with explicit 'Use when' clause. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes natural keywords users would say: 'microservices', 'distributed systems', 'monoliths', 'service boundaries', 'event-driven'. These are terms developers naturally use when discussing this domain. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Clear niche focused specifically on microservices architecture with distinct triggers like 'monoliths', 'service boundaries', 'event-driven communication' that wouldn't overlap with general coding or other architecture skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
65%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill provides comprehensive, executable code examples for microservices patterns which is its primary strength. However, it suffers from verbosity in the conceptual sections that explain things Claude already knows, and lacks explicit validation/verification workflows for the complex distributed operations it describes. The content would benefit from trimming the introductory material and adding clearer step-by-step validation guidance.
Suggestions
Remove or significantly condense the 'Core Concepts' section - Claude already understands these patterns; jump directly to the executable implementations
Add explicit validation checkpoints to the saga and service communication examples (e.g., 'Verify event was published by checking...', 'Confirm circuit breaker state before proceeding')
Move the lengthy code examples to referenced files and keep only minimal quick-start examples inline to improve progressive disclosure
Add a troubleshooting section with specific commands/checks for debugging common distributed system failures
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is moderately efficient but includes some unnecessary explanatory content like the 'Core Concepts' section that largely restates what Claude already knows about microservices patterns. The code examples are valuable but the surrounding prose could be tightened significantly. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable Python code examples for all major patterns including service decomposition, API gateway, event-driven communication, saga orchestration, and circuit breaker implementation. Code is copy-paste ready with proper imports and class structures. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | While the saga pattern shows clear step sequencing with compensation logic, the overall skill lacks explicit validation checkpoints and verification steps. For complex distributed system operations, there's no guidance on how to verify each step succeeded before proceeding or how to debug failures. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | References external files (references/, assets/) but the main content is quite long with inline code that could be split out. The structure is reasonable with sections, but the 'Core Concepts' section duplicates information that appears in more detail later, and the skill would benefit from a cleaner overview-to-detail flow. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 12 Passed |
Validation
81%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 13 / 16 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
skill_md_line_count | SKILL.md is long (596 lines); consider splitting into references/ and linking | Warning |
metadata_version | 'metadata' field is not a dictionary | Warning |
license_field | 'license' field is missing | Warning |
Total | 13 / 16 Passed | |
- 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.