postgres-patterns
PostgreSQL database patterns for query optimization, schema design, indexing, and security. Based on Supabase best practices.
54
60%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
—
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./docs/zh-TW/skills/postgres-patterns/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
32%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 identifies a clear domain (PostgreSQL/Supabase) and lists relevant topic areas, but it reads more like a category label than an actionable skill description. It lacks a 'Use when...' clause, which is critical for Claude to know when to select this skill, and the capabilities listed are high-level categories rather than concrete actions.
Suggestions
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause, e.g., 'Use when the user asks about PostgreSQL query performance, database schema design, Supabase configuration, or SQL optimization.'
Include common trigger term variations users would naturally say: 'postgres', 'SQL', 'slow queries', 'RLS policies', 'database migrations', 'row level security'.
Make capabilities more concrete by listing specific actions: 'Write optimized SQL queries, design normalized schemas, create appropriate indexes, configure Row Level Security (RLS) policies.'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (PostgreSQL) and lists several action areas (query optimization, schema design, indexing, security), but these are categories rather than concrete specific actions like 'create indexes', 'write RLS policies', or 'optimize slow queries'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Describes what the skill covers (PostgreSQL patterns for optimization, schema, indexing, security) but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. Per rubric guidelines, missing 'Use when' caps completeness at 2, and the 'what' is also only moderately detailed, warranting a 1. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes relevant keywords like 'PostgreSQL', 'query optimization', 'schema design', 'indexing', 'security', and 'Supabase', but misses common user variations like 'SQL', 'database performance', 'slow queries', 'RLS', 'migrations', 'postgres', or '.sql'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The mention of PostgreSQL and Supabase provides some distinctiveness, but 'database patterns', 'query optimization', and 'schema design' could overlap with general SQL skills or other database-related skills. The Supabase qualifier helps narrow it somewhat. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
87%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a high-quality reference skill that is exceptionally concise and actionable. It provides a comprehensive PostgreSQL cheat sheet with executable SQL examples covering indexing, data types, common patterns, anti-pattern detection, and configuration. The main weakness is the lack of explicit validation/verification steps in the configuration and migration-related sections, though this is partially mitigated by the reference to the `database-reviewer` agent for full workflow needs.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Extremely lean and efficient. Uses tables for quick reference, provides only actionable SQL examples, and avoids explaining what PostgreSQL or indexes are. Every section earns its place with concrete patterns Claude wouldn't inherently know (e.g., Supabase-specific RLS wrapping with SELECT, specific anti-pattern detection queries). | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | All guidance is concrete and copy-paste ready: executable SQL for index creation, anti-pattern detection queries, configuration templates, upsert patterns, queue processing with SKIP LOCKED, and cursor pagination. No pseudocode or vague instructions. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | This is primarily a reference/cheat-sheet skill rather than a multi-step workflow, so sequencing needs are lower. However, the configuration template section lacks validation steps (e.g., verifying settings took effect after pg_reload_conf), and there's no guidance on testing migrations or verifying index creation impact. For a reference skill this is acceptable but not exemplary. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Clean structure with well-organized sections (index cheat sheet, data types, common patterns, anti-patterns, config). Appropriately delegates deeper content to the `database-reviewer` agent and references related skills. For a standalone skill with no bundle files, the organization is excellent with clear section headers and table-based quick references. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 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.
- Repository
- ysyecust/everything-claude-code
- Commit
79cc4e3
- 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.