multi-cloud-architecture
Design multi-cloud architectures using a decision framework to select and integrate services across AWS, Azure, and GCP. Use when building multi-cloud systems, avoiding vendor lock-in, or leveraging best-of-breed services from multiple providers.
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:wshobson/agents --skill multi-cloud-architecture69
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/skillAgent success when using this skill
Validation for skill structure
Discovery
89%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-structured skill description with excellent completeness and trigger term coverage. The explicit 'Use when...' clause with multiple trigger scenarios is a strength. The main weakness is that the capabilities could be more specific about what concrete actions the skill enables beyond the general 'design' and 'select and integrate'.
Suggestions
Add 2-3 specific concrete actions to improve specificity, such as 'evaluate service equivalents across providers', 'design cross-cloud networking', or 'plan data residency strategies'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (multi-cloud architectures) and mentions 'decision framework' and 'select and integrate services', but doesn't list specific concrete actions like 'design network topology', 'configure cross-cloud IAM', or 'set up data replication'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what ('Design multi-cloud architectures using a decision framework to select and integrate services') and when ('Use when building multi-cloud systems, avoiding vendor lock-in, or leveraging best-of-breed services') with explicit trigger guidance. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural keywords users would say: 'multi-cloud', 'AWS', 'Azure', 'GCP', 'vendor lock-in', 'best-of-breed'. These are terms users naturally use when discussing multi-cloud architecture decisions. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The multi-cloud focus with all three major providers (AWS, Azure, GCP) and specific triggers like 'vendor lock-in' and 'best-of-breed' create a clear niche that's unlikely to conflict with single-cloud or general architecture skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
42%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill provides a useful reference framework for multi-cloud architecture decisions with good service comparison tables and clear organization. However, it fails to provide actionable, executable guidance - there are no code examples, Terraform configurations, or specific commands that Claude could use to actually implement these patterns. The content reads more like a conceptual overview than a practical skill.
Suggestions
Add executable Terraform examples showing how to provision equivalent resources across AWS/Azure/GCP (e.g., a simple VM or storage bucket in each provider)
Include concrete validation steps in the migration workflow, such as specific commands to verify connectivity, data integrity checks, and rollback procedures
Replace generic best practices list with specific, actionable guidance - e.g., actual Terraform module patterns for cloud-agnostic abstractions
Add a concrete example of implementing one multi-cloud pattern end-to-end with actual configuration files
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is reasonably organized but includes some unnecessary explanation (e.g., 'Purpose' and 'When to Use' sections that Claude could infer). The comparison tables are efficient, but the best practices list is generic advice Claude already knows. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill lacks concrete, executable guidance. No code examples, no specific commands, no Terraform snippets. It describes patterns and lists services but doesn't show how to actually implement anything - it's descriptive rather than instructive. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The migration strategy has clear phases, but lacks validation checkpoints and feedback loops. No explicit verification steps between phases, no rollback procedures, and no concrete criteria for proceeding to the next phase. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Good structure with clear overview sections and well-signaled references to external files (service-comparison.md, multi-cloud-patterns.md). Content is appropriately split with one-level-deep references and related skills clearly linked. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 12 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 — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- 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.