CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

api-contract-review

Use when auditing CloudBase cloud API wrappers, MCP tools, generated action metadata, or related docs for outdated or incorrect action names, parameters, casing, request shapes, or missing contract tests, especially during periodic quality review or before preparing corrective PRs.

62

Quality

73%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/api-contract-review/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

47%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

The workflow is clearly sequenced with strong validation checkpoints, but the body suffers a verbatim duplicated section and inlines reference content instead of deferring it, hurting token efficiency and progressive disclosure. Actionability is decent but lacks executable examples.

Suggestions

Remove the duplicate '### Internal parameters' block (lines 75-87) — it is an exact repeat of the section directly above it and purely wastes tokens.

Defer the contract checklist, finding-label taxonomy, and documentation URLs to references/review-checklist.md (which already contains them) and link to it instead of restating them inline in the SKILL.md body.

Add at least one concrete, executable verification step — e.g. a sample API call, a grep for action names in mcp/src/tools/*, or a test snippet — to lift actionability from instructive to copy-paste ready.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The entire '### Internal parameters' subsection (EnvTypes in DescribeEnvs and the surrounding guidance) is duplicated verbatim twice, and the body restates documentation URLs, contract checklist items, and finding labels that already live in references/review-checklist.md — significant padding that wastes tokens.

1 / 3

Actionability

Guidance is concrete in places (named doc URLs, file paths like mcp/src/tools/*, finding-label taxonomy, routing targets) but offers no executable command, code, or queryable example for verifying a contract — it instructs rather than gives copy-paste-ready steps.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

Four phases are clearly sequenced with explicit validation checkpoints ('you must read the relevant official documentation first', 'treat the implementation as unverified and stop short of guessing', 'incomplete without tests that would fail on the previous wrong contract') and an escalation ladder matching the feedback-loop criterion.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The single reference references/review-checklist.md exists and is one level deep, but the SKILL.md body inlines substantial checklist content (doc URLs, contract items, finding labels) already covered by that reference rather than pointing to it, so structure could be better split.

2 / 3

Total

8

/

12

Passed

Description

100%

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A strong, well-targeted description that states concrete capabilities, natural trigger terms, and explicit 'when' guidance within a distinct niche. It reads in third person and avoids fluff or over-claims.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists several concrete actions ('auditing CloudBase cloud API wrappers, MCP tools, generated action metadata'), and specific defect types ('outdated or incorrect action names, parameters, casing, request shapes, or missing contract tests'), matching the 'multiple specific concrete actions' anchor.

3 / 3

Completeness

Clearly answers both 'what' (auditing wrappers/tools/metadata/docs for contract defects) and 'when' via an explicit 'Use when' clause plus situational triggers ('especially during periodic quality review or before preparing corrective PRs').

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Natural user-facing terms are well covered — 'auditing', 'CloudBase cloud API wrappers', 'MCP tools', 'action names', 'parameters', 'casing', 'request shapes', 'contract tests', 'corrective PRs' — terms a reviewer would actually say when invoking the skill.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The CloudBase contract-correctness niche is distinct from general code review, and the negative scoping ('outdated/incorrect action names, parameter casing, request shape') gives clear triggers unlikely to fire for unrelated skills.

3 / 3

Total

12

/

12

Passed

Validation

93%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
TencentCloudBase/CloudBase-AI-Toolkit
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.