SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

AA backend-architect

Expert backend architect specializing in scalable API design, microservices architecture, and distributed systems.

sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills Agent Skills author: sickn33 MIT 1 file body ≈ 4 672 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 35 h ago

Expert backend architect specializing in scalable API design, microservices architecture, and distributed systems.

As a process A 84/100 · Runs to the end — no weak spots found

IntegrationAWSAzureInfrastructureSoftware developmentWriting and documentstype 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
93/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
99
Quality 40%
84
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
A
84/100
Runs to the end
When it triggers w 12
50
Failures and branches w 10
50
Inputs and preconditions w 11
70
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

The same skill appears in 1 more place: agentic-awesome-skills

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 · 1

    ✓ No critical or high findings

    Medium and low: 1
    • low Risky intent intent-offensive-security SKILL.md:221
      Offensive-security / dual-use content (legitimate for authorised testing; review intended use)
      - **Security testing**: Penetration testing, vulnerability scanning, OWASP Top 10

    Files scanned: 1. 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    • note edit-residue the text marks something as outdated (lines 64, 139): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions

    Process rating: all ten parameters 84/100

    • 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
    • 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
    • 70Inputs and preconditions. Inputs and preconditions are listed
    • 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 4672 tokens
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Steps. 231 steps
    • 100Result and completion. Output format and completion criterion are stated
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Running it twice. Mutating operations check current state
    • 100Progress reporting. Reports progress
    • medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
    • low 14 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill

    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)
    • +3Description length 114: 120–800 characters recommended
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +4Structure: 31 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 231 items
    • +3Output format is stated explicitly
    • +4Has examples (0 code blocks)

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 84.