Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Analyze Azure resource groups and generate detailed Mermaid architecture diagrams showing the relationships between individual resources. WHEN: create architecture diagram, visualize Azure resources, show resource relationships, generate Mermaid diagram, analyze resource group, diagram my resources, architecture visualization, resource topology, map Azure infrastructure.
.claude/skills/azure-resource-visualizer/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-13 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-08 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-23 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-19 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
| case-11 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | — | — |
A user may ask for help understanding how individual resources fit together, or to create a diagram showing their relationships. Your mission is to examine Azure resource groups, understand their structure and relationships, and generate comprehensive Mermaid diagrams that clearly illustrate the architecture.
If the user hasn't specified a resource group:
az.If a resource group is specified, validate it exists and proceed.
For bulk resource discovery across subscriptions, use Azure Resource Graph queries. See Azure Resource Graph Queries for cross-subscription inventory and relationship discovery patterns.
Once you have the resource group:
az.> Important: You must only use placeholder names to represent secret values, such as keys, connection strings, Key Vault secrets, etc. Use meaningful placeholder names to represent each secret in the diagram. Never put secret values in the resource diagram.
Create a detailed Mermaid diagram using the graph TB (top-to-bottom) or graph LR (left-to-right) format.
See example-diagram.md for a complete sample architecture diagram.
Key Diagram Requirements:
<br/> for line breaks)--> for data flow or dependencies-.-> for optional/conditional connections==> for critical/primary pathsResource Type Examples:
Use template-architecture.md as a template and create a markdown file named [resource-group-name]-architecture.md with:
intent="list resource groups" to discover resource groupsintent="list resources in group" with group name to get all resourcesintent="get resource details" for individual resource analysiscommand parameter when you need specific Azure operationsdocs/ folder if it exists[rg-name]-architecture.mdaz resource list --resource-group <name> --output jsonaz network vnet show --resource-group <name> --name <vnet-name>Always Do:
Never Do:
graph TB (top-to-bottom) for vertical layoutsgraph LR (left-to-right) for horizontal layouts (better for wide architectures)subgraph "Descriptive Name"ID["Display Name<br/>Details"]SOURCE -->|"Label"| TARGETmermaid language tag for diagramsA successful analysis includes:
Your goal is to provide clarity and insight into Azure architectures, making complex resource relationships easy to understand through excellent visualization.
| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-15 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-13 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-08 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-05 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-23 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-14 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-19 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-06 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-11 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-09 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-04 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-20 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-02 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-03 | fail→pass | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-01 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-16 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-21 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-18 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-10 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-12 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-07 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-17 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
case-22 | fail→fail | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — | — |
DecimalAI ran this skill against gemini-3.6-flash twice over the same eval suite — once with the skill loaded and once without — and compared the two runs case by case. 23 cases were attempted, and 21 counted toward the lift figure. The other 2 produced results that are not comparable between the two arms, so they are excluded from the headline rather than averaged into it. The headline lift of +26 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 21 comparable cases. 2 cases got worse with the skill loaded, and they are included in that figure.
The per-case answers from this run were removed by the retention sweep, so the case table below shows the verdicts without the text either arm produced. The counts above were recorded at the time and are unaffected. Answers are now kept for 180 days.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.