Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →Apply microservices patterns (Saga, CQRS, Event Sourcing, Circuit Breaker, API Gateway, Service Discovery) with implementation guidance and templates.
.claude/skills/williamzujkowski-microservices-pattern-architect/SKILL.md| Test case | Without → With | Effect | Δ tokens | Δ turns |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| case-04 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 120% | 0% |
| case-05 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 179% | 0% |
| case-07 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 108% | 0% |
| case-14 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 176% | 0% |
| case-20 | ✗→✓ | ▲ Improved | 187% | 0% |
Trigger conditions:
Not for:
Time normalization:
NOW_ET using NIST/time.gov semantics (America/New_York, ISO-8601): 2025-10-25T21:30:36-04:00NOW_ET for all citation access datesInput validation:
scenario must be one of: distributed transaction, data consistency, fault tolerance, api composition, service location, or a combinationarchitecture_context must describe: existing services, communication patterns, data storesdeployment_tier must be: T1 or T2framework_preference if specified must be: spring-boot, nodejs, .net, go, or pythonscalability_requirements if provided must include at least one SLO metricSource freshness:
Abort conditions:
architecture_context is missing or too vague, request service inventory with data flowsStep 1: Scenario Analysis
scenario to identify primary concern: transactions, consistency, resilience, routing, or discoveryStep 2: Quick Pattern Selection
Step 3: Quick Recommendation Output
T1 Token Budget: ≤2k tokens
Includes T1, plus:
Step 4: Pattern Deep-Dive
For Saga Pattern:
For CQRS Pattern:
For Event Sourcing:
For Circuit Breaker:
For API Gateway:
For Service Discovery:
Step 5: Implementation Template Generation
framework_preference (if specified)Step 6: Anti-Patterns and Pitfalls
Step 7: Observability and Monitoring Strategy
Step 8: Integration with Deployment Patterns
T2 Token Budget: ≤6k tokens (cumulative with T1)
Pattern Selection Decision Tree:
Composition Rules:
Abort/Stop Conditions:
architecture_context lacks service boundaries → invoke architecture-decision-frameworkframework_preference and T2 requested → provide polyglot pseudo-code insteadRequired fields (all tiers):
json{ "pattern_recommendation": { "primary_pattern": "Saga | CQRS | Event Sourcing | Circuit Breaker | API Gateway | Service Discovery", "variant": "choreography | orchestration | BFF | client-side | server-side (optional)", "justification": "Why this pattern fits the scenario (1-2 sentences)", "trade_offs": { "pros": ["list of advantages"], "cons": ["list of disadvantages and constraints"] }, "complexity": "low | medium | high" }, "implementation_template": { "language": "spring-boot | nodejs | .net | go | python | polyglot (string)", "code_scaffolding": "File path to resources/ template or inline code snippet", "dependencies": ["list of required libraries/frameworks"] }, "anti_patterns": [ { "name": "anti-pattern name", "description": "what to avoid", "mitigation": "how to avoid it" } ], "integration_guidance": { "steps": ["ordered list of implementation steps"], "decision_points": ["key decisions to make during implementation"] } }
Additional fields (T2 only):
json{ "event_schemas": [ { "event_type": "EventName", "version": "1.0.0", "schema": { "json schema or example payload" }, "versioning_strategy": "semantic | append-only | upcasting" } ], "monitoring_strategy": { "metrics": ["pattern-specific metrics to track"], "traces": "distributed tracing requirements", "alerts": ["recommended alert conditions"] }, "deployment_integration": { "kubernetes_resources": "ConfigMap, Service, Deployment annotations", "service_mesh_config": "Istio VirtualService, DestinationRule (if applicable)" } }
Example: Saga Pattern for Order Processing
yaml# Input scenario: distributed transaction architecture_context: services: - OrderService: manages orders - PaymentService: processes payments - InventoryService: reserves stock - ShipmentService: schedules shipping communication: REST APIs deployment_tier: T1 # Output pattern_recommendation: primary_pattern: Saga variant: choreography justification: "Event-driven choreography allows loosely coupled services to coordinate order fulfillment with compensating transactions for failures." trade_offs: pros: - "Loosely coupled services" - "No single point of failure" - "Natural fit for event-driven architecture" cons: - "Harder to debug distributed flow" - "Eventual consistency requires UX consideration" complexity: medium
Token budgets (enforced):
Safety:
your-api-key, localhost)Auditability:
NOW_ETDeterminism:
scenario + architecture_context → same primary pattern recommendationframework_preferenceQuality checks:
Pattern Catalogs:
Pattern-Specific References:
Implementation Frameworks:
Templates (see resources/ folder):
saga-choreography-template.yaml: Event-driven saga with compensationssaga-orchestration-template.yaml: Central coordinator saga patterncqrs-event-sourcing-template.yaml: Combined CQRS + Event Sourcingcircuit-breaker-config.yaml: Resilience4j/Polly configuration examplesapi-gateway-routes.yaml: Kong/Spring Cloud Gateway route definitionsevent-schemas/: Sample event schemas with versioningBooks and Courses:
| Case | Status | Duration (ms) | Turns | Tokens | Tool calls | ||||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | Without | With | Δ | ||
case-01 | pass→pass | 16,949 | 8,831 | -48% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,275 | 6,570 | +101% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-02 | pass→pass | 30,111 | 22,172 | -26% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 6,268 | 9,864 | +57% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-03 | pass→pass | 30,136 | 18,945 | -37% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 6,273 | 8,756 | +40% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-04 | fail→pass | 19,196 | 15,607 | -19% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,541 | 7,773 | +120% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-05 | fail→pass | 13,397 | 11,215 | -16% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,430 | 6,769 | +179% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-06 | fail→fail | 9,492 | 12,704 | +34% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,884 | 7,189 | +282% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-07 | fail→pass | 15,314 | 10,282 | -33% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,257 | 6,772 | +108% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-08 | pass→pass | 15,330 | 10,425 | -32% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,943 | 6,812 | +131% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-09 | pass→pass | 14,645 | 8,022 | -45% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,565 | 6,328 | +147% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-19 | pass→fail | 10,947 | 21,573 | +97% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,187 | 9,545 | +336% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-10 | pass→pass | 11,071 | 9,364 | -15% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,248 | 6,711 | +199% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-11 | pass→pass | 13,802 | 9,669 | -30% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 3,027 | 6,695 | +121% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-12 | pass→pass | 13,883 | 7,663 | -45% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,608 | 6,201 | +138% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-13 | pass→pass | 19,063 | 12,491 | -34% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 4,400 | 7,450 | +69% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-14 | fail→pass | 12,067 | 10,693 | -11% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,512 | 6,935 | +176% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-15 | pass→pass | 12,591 | 9,105 | -28% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,505 | 6,601 | +164% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-16 | fail→fail | 11,108 | 8,362 | -25% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,215 | 6,281 | +184% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-17 | fail→fail | 11,543 | 11,592 | +0% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,127 | 7,009 | +230% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-18 | pass→pass | 8,350 | 11,659 | +40% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 1,601 | 7,128 | +345% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-20 | fail→pass | 11,669 | 12,496 | +7% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,590 | 7,440 | +187% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-21 | fail→pass | 13,370 | 17,880 | +34% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,462 | 8,387 | +241% | 0 | 0 | — |
case-22 | fail→fail | 12,903 | 13,984 | +8% | 1 | 1 | 0% | 2,850 | 7,647 | +168% | 0 | 0 | — |
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. 22 cases were attempted. The headline lift of +23 percentage points is the difference between those two pass rates over the 22 comparable cases. 1 case got worse with the skill loaded, and it is included in that figure.
Without the skill loaded, the model failed this case. With it loaded, the same prompt on the same model passed. This is one improved case from the latest verified run; every case, including any that regressed, is in the table above.
Other measured skills in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.