SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

AC legacy-modernizer

Designs incremental migration strategies, identifies service boundaries, produces dependency maps and migration roadmaps, and generates API facade designs for aging codebases. Use when modernizing legacy systems, implementing strangler fig pattern or branch by abstraction, decomposing monoliths, upgrading frameworks or languages, or reducing technical debt without disrupting business operations.

Jeffallan/claude-skills Agent Skills author: Jeffallan MIT 6 files body ≈ 1 350 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 3 d ago

Designs incremental migration strategies, identifies service boundaries, produces dependency maps and migration roadmaps, and generates API facade designs for…

As a process C 64/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: when it triggers, inputs and preconditions, running it twice

GeneratorSoftware developmenttype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: Claude / Claude Code ChatGPT / Codex Gemini CLI Cursor GitHub Copilot / VS Code Qwen Code Kimi Code CLI Z.ai (GLM) DeepSeek (Deep Code) Mistral Vibe LangChain (deepagents) OpenClaw Goose OpenCode
JSON
Technical rating
A
97/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
92
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
64/100
Has gaps
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
When it triggers w 12
20
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

    For the model run — optional
    • Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
    • A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.

    Guard findings · 0

    ✓ No critical or high findings

    Files scanned: 6. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

    Against the Agent Skills spec

    • note edit-residue the text marks something as outdated (lines 2, 13, 18, 19, 30, 37): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions

    Process rating: all ten parameters 64/100

    • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
    • 30Running it twice. 7 mutating operations with no state check
    • 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
    • 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Steps. 29 steps
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1350 tokens

    Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.

    Quality signals

    • +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
    • +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +3Description length 398: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 12 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 29 items
    • +3Output format is stated explicitly
    • +4Has examples (3 code blocks)
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (5 of 5)
    • +1License stated

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 92.