api-testing-observability-api-mock
You are an API mocking expert specializing in realistic mock services for development, testing, and demos. Design mocks that simulate real API behavior and enable parallel development.
47
Quality
32%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./.agent/skills/api-testing-observability-api-mock/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
22%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This description uses second person voice ('You are') which violates the style guidelines, and reads more like a persona prompt than a skill description. It lacks concrete actions, explicit trigger conditions, and natural user keywords. The description would struggle to differentiate itself in a large skill library.
Suggestions
Rewrite in third person voice describing capabilities (e.g., 'Creates mock API endpoints, generates realistic response data, simulates error conditions and latency')
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms like 'mock API', 'stub endpoint', 'fake server', 'API testing', 'parallel development'
List specific concrete actions such as 'define mock endpoints', 'configure response schemas', 'simulate authentication flows', 'generate sample payloads'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Uses vague language like 'realistic mock services' and 'simulate real API behavior' without listing concrete actions. No specific capabilities like 'create mock endpoints', 'generate response schemas', or 'configure latency simulation' are mentioned. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | Describes a general 'what' (API mocking) but lacks any explicit 'when' clause or trigger guidance. No 'Use when...' statement is present, and the use cases mentioned (development, testing, demos) are too vague to serve as triggers. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Contains some relevant keywords ('API mocking', 'mock services', 'development', 'testing', 'demos') but misses common variations users might say like 'stub', 'fake API', 'mock server', 'API simulation', or specific tools/formats. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The 'API mocking' focus provides some distinction, but terms like 'development' and 'testing' are generic and could overlap with many other skills. Could conflict with general API skills, testing skills, or development workflow skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
42%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill provides decent structure and progressive disclosure but lacks actionable, concrete guidance in the main file. The instructions are too abstract without executable examples, and the workflow lacks validation checkpoints. The skill relies heavily on external resources without providing enough standalone value.
Suggestions
Add at least one concrete, executable code example (e.g., a minimal Express/FastAPI mock server setup) directly in the skill file
Replace abstract instructions like 'Clarify the API contract' with specific actions like 'Ask user for: endpoint paths, HTTP methods, request/response schemas, auth type'
Add a validation step to the workflow, such as 'Test mock endpoint with curl before proceeding' with an example command
Remove the redundant 'Context' section and the persona statement to improve conciseness
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is reasonably efficient but includes some unnecessary framing ('You are an API mocking expert...') and context that Claude already understands. The 'Context' section restates what's already clear from the title and description. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The instructions are vague and abstract ('Clarify the API contract', 'Define mock routes') without any concrete code, commands, or executable examples. No copy-paste ready snippets or specific implementation guidance is provided in the main skill file. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps are listed in the Instructions section but lack explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops. The sequence is present but there's no guidance on verifying mock correctness or handling errors during setup. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Clear structure with well-signaled references to implementation-playbook.md for detailed code samples and templates. The main skill serves as an overview with appropriate one-level-deep navigation to resources. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- Dokhacgiakhoa/antigravity-ide
- Commit
3395991
- Reviewed
Table of Contents
Is this your skill?
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.