The description is highly specific about what it does, naming exact APIs and file paths, which makes it distinctive and unlikely to conflict with other skills. However, it lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause, which caps completeness, and the trigger terms are heavily technical jargon that may not match how users naturally phrase requests.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger phrases, e.g., 'Use when the user wants to consume a remote micro frontend, load a federated module, or integrate a Module Federation remote component.'

Include common natural language variations like 'micro frontend', 'federated module', 'remote app', 'MFE integration' to improve trigger term coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'scaffold and wire a Module Federation remote component consumer' using named constructs 'MFEConfig, createRemoteComponent, and LoadComponent' under a specific path. Very concrete.	3 / 3
Completeness	Clearly answers 'what does this do' (scaffold and wire a Module Federation remote component consumer using specific APIs), but lacks an explicit 'Use when...' clause or equivalent trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill.	2 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Includes relevant technical terms like 'Module Federation', 'remote component', 'MFE', and specific API names, but these are fairly specialized jargon. Missing more natural user phrases like 'micro frontend', 'federated module', 'load remote app', or 'consume remote component'.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Highly specific niche — Module Federation remote component consumer using a named service layer at a specific path. Very unlikely to conflict with other skills due to the precise technology and file path references.	3 / 3
	Total	10 / 12 Passed

Implementation

64%

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

This is a well-structured, actionable skill with concrete code examples and clear placeholder conventions that make it immediately usable. Its main weaknesses are the lack of validation/verification steps in the workflow (e.g., how to confirm the remote is correctly wired) and redundant repetition of the Component Folder Pattern rules. Trimming the duplication and adding a verification checkpoint would elevate this skill significantly.

Suggestions

Add a verification step after Step 4 (e.g., 'Step 5 — Verify: run the dev server and confirm the remote component renders without console errors; check that `registerRemotes` logs the expected remote name').

Remove the 'Cross-reference — Component Folder Pattern' section at the end and consolidate it into the existing 'Architecture Rule' section with a single-line reference to the react-component skill, eliminating the duplication.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The skill is mostly efficient but has some redundancy — the Component Folder Pattern is stated in the 'Architecture Rule' section and then repeated almost verbatim in the 'Cross-reference' section at the end. The comparison tables and interface reference are useful but could be slightly tighter. Some explanatory text (e.g., 'Do not use this skill to create or modify the remote MFE itself') is reasonable scoping, not excessive.	2 / 3
Actionability	The skill provides fully executable TypeScript/TSX code for both static and dynamic consumption patterns, concrete file paths, barrel export patterns, and a clear placeholder system. The code examples are copy-paste ready with well-defined substitution points.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Steps 1–4 provide a clear sequence for building the consumer, but there are no validation or verification checkpoints. For a multi-step process that involves wiring remote components (which can fail at runtime), there should be explicit steps to verify the remote is reachable, the component renders correctly, or at minimum a 'test your wiring' step. The absence of any feedback loop caps this at 2.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The skill references a 'react-component' skill for the Component Folder Pattern but then duplicates much of that content inline. There are no bundle files to offload the reference tables or detailed examples to. The content is reasonably structured with sections and tables, but the inline repetition and lack of actual supporting files (despite references to them) weakens the disclosure pattern.	2 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 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 — 11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Reviewed

15 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation