waf-assessment
installsforks
How to install waf-assessment?
thomast1906/github-copilot-agent-skills/waf-assessment
$npx -y skills add thomast1906/github-copilot-agent-skills --skill waf-assessmentAssess Azure architectures against Well-Architected Framework (WAF) five pillars - Reliability, Security, Cost Optimization, Operational Excellence, and Performance Efficiency. Provide scores and recommendations.
SKILL.md
| 1 | # Well-Architected Framework Assessment Skill |
| 2 | |
| 3 | Evaluate Azure architectures against Microsoft's Well-Architected Framework (WAF) five pillars to identify strengths, risks, and improvement opportunities. |
| 4 | |
| 5 | ## When to Use |
| 6 | |
| 7 | - Assess existing or proposed Azure architectures |
| 8 | - Validate designs meet WAF best practices |
| 9 | - Identify architectural risks and gaps |
| 10 | - Provide scored assessment with recommendations |
| 11 | - Review before production deployment |
| 12 | |
| 13 | ## Five Pillars Overview |
| 14 | |
| 15 | ### 1. Reliability |
| 16 | Ability of the system to recover from failures and continue functioning. |
| 17 | - **Focus**: Availability, resiliency, disaster recovery, health monitoring |
| 18 | |
| 19 | ### 2. Security |
| 20 | Protecting applications and data from threats. |
| 21 | - **Focus**: Identity, network security, encryption, secrets management |
| 22 | |
| 23 | ### 3. Cost Optimization |
| 24 | Managing costs to maximize value delivered. |
| 25 | - **Focus**: Right-sizing, reserved instances, monitoring, waste elimination |
| 26 | |
| 27 | ### 4. Operational Excellence |
| 28 | Operations processes that keep a system running in production. |
| 29 | - **Focus**: IaC, CI/CD, monitoring, incident response, automation |
| 30 | |
| 31 | ### 5. Performance Efficiency |
| 32 | Ability of a system to adapt to changes in load. |
| 33 | - **Focus**: Scaling, caching, CDN, resource selection, optimization |
| 34 | |
| 35 | ## Assessment Process |
| 36 | |
| 37 | ### Step 1: Analyze Architecture |
| 38 | |
| 39 | Review the architecture for each pillar: |
| 40 | |
| 41 | **Reliability Checklist:** |
| 42 | - [ ] Availability Zones configured? |
| 43 | - [ ] Multi-region deployment for critical workloads? |
| 44 | - [ ] Health checks and monitoring configured? |
| 45 | - [ ] Auto-healing and circuit breakers implemented? |
| 46 | - [ ] Backup strategy defined with RPO/RTO? |
| 47 | - [ ] Disaster recovery plan documented? |
| 48 | |
| 49 | **Security Checklist:** |
| 50 | - [ ] Managed identities used (no credentials in code)? |
| 51 | - [ ] Private endpoints for PaaS services? |
| 52 | - [ ] HTTPS only with TLS 1.2+? |
| 53 | - [ ] Network security groups with least privilege? |
| 54 | - [ ] Key Vault for secrets management? |
| 55 | - [ ] Azure AD authentication and RBAC configured? |
| 56 | - [ ] Data encrypted at rest and in transit? |
| 57 | |
| 58 | **Cost Optimization Checklist:** |
| 59 | - [ ] Resources right-sized for actual usage? |
| 60 | - [ ] Auto-scaling configured? |
| 61 | - [ ] Reserved instances considered for predictable workloads? |
| 62 | - [ ] Storage tiering implemented (Hot/Cool/Archive)? |
| 63 | - [ ] Unused resources identified? |
| 64 | - [ ] Cost monitoring and alerts configured? |
| 65 | |
| 66 | **Operational Excellence Checklist:** |
| 67 | - [ ] Infrastructure as Code (Bicep/Terraform)? |
| 68 | - [ ] CI/CD pipelines implemented? |
| 69 | - [ ] Application Insights for telemetry? |
| 70 | - [ ] Centralized logging (Log Analytics)? |
| 71 | - [ ] Alerts configured for critical scenarios? |
| 72 | - [ ] Deployment automation and rollback? |
| 73 | |
| 74 | **Performance Efficiency Checklist:** |
| 75 | - [ ] CDN for static content? |
| 76 | - [ ] Caching strategy (Redis, CDN)? |
| 77 | - [ ] Asynchronous processing for long operations? |
| 78 | - [ ] Appropriate compute SKUs selected? |
| 79 | - [ ] Auto-scaling rules defined? |
| 80 | - [ ] Performance testing completed? |
| 81 | |
| 82 | ### Step 2: Score Each Pillar |
| 83 | |
| 84 | Use 0-100 scoring system: |
| 85 | |
| 86 | **Scoring Criteria:** |
| 87 | - **80-100 (Excellent):** Meets all best practices, production-ready |
| 88 | - **60-79 (Good):** Meets most practices, minor gaps |
| 89 | - **40-59 (Fair):** Some practices missing, moderate risk |
| 90 | - **20-39 (Poor):** Many gaps, significant improvements needed |
| 91 | - **0-19 (Critical):** Major gaps, not production-ready |
| 92 | |
| 93 | ### Step 3: Provide Recommendations |
| 94 | |
| 95 | For each identified gap: |
| 96 | - **Finding**: What's missing or problematic |
| 97 | - **Risk**: Impact if not addressed |
| 98 | - **Recommendation**: Specific action to take |
| 99 | - **Priority**: Critical / High / Medium / Low |
| 100 | - **Effort**: Hours or days to implement |
| 101 | |
| 102 | ## Assessment Output Format |
| 103 | |
| 104 | ```markdown |
| 105 | # Well-Architected Framework Assessment |
| 106 | **Architecture**: [Name] |
| 107 | **Assessment Date**: [Date] |
| 108 | **Overall Score**: [Average of 5 pillars]/100 |
| 109 | |
| 110 | ## Executive Summary |
| 111 | [2-3 sentences on overall health, key strengths, top risks] |
| 112 | |
| 113 | ## Pillar Scores |
| 114 | |
| 115 | | Pillar | Score | Status | |
| 116 | |--------|-------|--------| |
| 117 | | Reliability | 75/100 | 🟢 Good | |
| 118 | | Security | 65/100 | 🟡 Fair | |
| 119 | | Cost Optimization | 80/100 | 🟢 Good | |
| 120 | | Operational Excellence | 70/100 | 🟡 Fair | |
| 121 | | Performance Efficiency | 85/100 | 🟢 Excellent | |
| 122 | | **Overall** | **75/100** | **🟢 Good** | |
| 123 | |
| 124 | --- |
| 125 | |
| 126 | ## 1. Reliability (75/100) - 🟢 Good |
| 127 | |
| 128 | ### Strengths |
| 129 | Availability Zones configured for App Service and Azure SQL |
| 130 | Health checks implemented with automatic failover |
| 131 | Backup strategy defined (RPO: 1 hour, RTO: 4 hours) |
| 132 | |
| 133 | ### Gaps & Recommendations |
| 134 | |
| 135 | #### Finding #1: No Multi-Region Deployment |
| 136 | **Risk**: Regional outage causes complete service unavailability |
| 137 | **Recommendation**: Implement active-passive multi-region with Azure Front Door |
| 138 | **Priority**: High |
| 139 | **Effort**: 3-5 days |
| 140 | **Implementation**: Deploy secondary region (West US), configure Azure Front Door with pr |
People who liked this also viewed
6 picksType
- find-skillsHelps users discover and install agent skills when they ask questions like "how do I do X", "find a skill for X", "is there a skill that can...", or express interest in extending capabilities. This skSkillsJul 2026
- grill-meA relentless interview to sharpen a plan or design.SkillsJul 2026
- vercel-react-best-practicesVercel's official collection of agent skillsSkillsJul 2026
- improve-codebase-architectureScan a codebase for deepening opportunities, present them as a visual HTML report, then grill through whichever one you pick.SkillsJul 2026
- setup-matt-pocock-skillsConfigure this repo for the engineering skills — set up its issue tracker, triage label vocabulary, and domain doc layout. Run once before first use of the other engineering skills.SkillsJul 2026
- triageMove issues and external PRs through a state machine of triage roles — categorise, verify, grill if needed, and write agent-ready briefs.SkillsJul 2026
