data-contract-framework

Looking at how you've structured the data contract validation—treating schemas as first-class citizens rather than afterthoughts—there's real architectural thinking here, though the execution could be tighter in a few areas.

Links:

• GitHub
• SkillzWave marketplace

The TL;DR

You're at 67/100, solidly in D territory. Based on Anthropic's skills best practices, your writing style is sharp (8/10), but Progressive Disclosure Architecture (18/30) and Ease of Use (17/25) are dragging things down. The core framework is solid—you just need to make it more discoverable and actionable for Claude to actually use it.

What's Working Well

• Writing style is clean. No fluff, professional tone throughout. You're not overselling—you're explaining.
• Consistent terminology. "Contract," "SLA," "owner," "audit" are used reliably, so Claude would understand the conceptual model.
• Real problem you're solving. Data contracts as a coordination tool between data producers and consumers is legitimately useful; not a toy problem.
• Structure is grep-friendly. Simple file layout, clear section headers—easy to parse.

The Big One: Missing Trigger Phrases in Description

This is your biggest blocker for discoverability. Your description reads like:

Operating model for defining, enforcing, and auditing BI data contracts.

Claude doesn't know to invoke this skill when someone asks "help me define a data contract" or "run data contract validation." Without trigger phrases, this skill is invisible.

The fix: Rewrite to include explicit triggers:

Define, enforce, and audit BI data contracts with SLAs and ownership. Use when asked to "create a data contract", "define table SLAs", "enforce data contracts", "audit data contracts", or "coordinate schema changes".

Impact: +2-3 points immediately.

Other Things Worth Fixing

1. Templates exist only in your head. You mention "Data contract one-pager," "Change request form," and "Audit checklist" but don't provide them as reference files. Create references/templates/contract-template.md, change-request.md, and audit-checklist.md with actual content. This unlocks Progressive Disclosure (+5 points).

2. No actionable workflow for Claude. Your framework lists components (Scope, Owner Matrix, SLAs) but not numbered steps. Add a "How to Create a Contract" section: 1. Identify the table and business purpose. 2. Document owners using template. 3. Define SLA thresholds. 4. Run validation checklist. (+3 points)

3. Missing validation loops. You mention "audit" but don't explain how to verify a contract is complete or working. Add a "Validation Steps" section with concrete checks: verify all fields filled, confirm owner contacts, test SLA queries. (+2 points)

4. Zero concrete examples. No sample contract, no before/after. Add references/examples/sample-contract.md showing a real table like user_events with a completed contract. (+1-2 points)

Quick Wins

• Add trigger phrases to description → +2 points, ~5 min
• Create 3 template reference files → +5 points, ~20 min
• Add numbered workflow steps → +3 points, ~10 min
• Add one concrete example → +2 points, ~10 min

Target those and you're looking at 79/100 (C-level), maybe 82/100 if you nail the validation section.

Checkout your skill here: SkillzWave.ai | SpillWave We have an agentic skill installer that install skills in 14+ coding agent platforms. Check out this guide on how to improve your agentic skills.