CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

api-documenter

Master API documentation with OpenAPI 3.1, AI-powered tools, and modern developer experience practices. Create interactive docs, generate SDKs, and build comprehensive developer portals.

67

1.00x
Quality

59%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

100%

1.00x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills/skills/api-documenter/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is api-documenter in rmyndharis/antigravity-skills

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

35%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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

The body reads as a persona/résumé document rather than an operational skill: it is dominated by padded capability and knowledge lists, provides no concrete commands, examples, or templates, and offers two overlapping high-level sequences with no explicit validation checkpoints. Only the 'Use this skill when' / 'Do not use' sections add real operational value.

Suggestions

Cut the Purpose, Capabilities, Behavioral Traits, Knowledge Base, and Example Interactions sections — they restate what Claude already knows — and keep only the use-when/do-not-use triggers plus a concise operational workflow.

Add concrete, executable guidance: example OpenAPI 3.1 snippet patterns, specific validation commands (e.g., spectral linting of a spec), or a worked SDK-generation example with tool names.

Consolidate Instructions and Response Approach into one sequenced workflow with explicit validation checkpoints (e.g., validate spec -> fix errors -> re-validate -> then generate docs/SDKs).

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

Noticeably verbose with several padded sections: Purpose restates the description, and Capabilities/Behavioral Traits/Knowledge Base enumerate ~130 lines of tools and concepts (Swagger UI, OAuth 2.0, Docusaurus, CI/CD) Claude already knows without adding instruction.

2 / 5

Actionability

No executable code, commands, or templates anywhere in the body; guidance consists of high-level hints like "Create or validate specifications with examples and auth flows" that omit the specific steps, tools, or commands to execute.

2 / 5

Workflow Clarity

Instructions (4 steps) and Response Approach (8 steps) provide a listed sequence, but they overlap as two competing step lists and validation is only implicit ("ensure accuracy with tests"), with no explicit checkpoints.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The body has clear section headers but is a single monolithic file with a large inline capability catalog that should live in separate reference files; no bundle files exist to offload it.

3 / 5

Total

10

/

20

Passed

Description

66%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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

The description communicates a clear, mostly distinct API-documentation niche with several concrete actions and natural trigger terms, but it lacks an explicit "Use when..." clause and carries buzzword padding ("AI-powered tools", "modern developer experience practices").

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' trigger clause (e.g., 'Use when creating or updating OpenAPI/AsyncAPI specs, generating SDKs, or building developer portals') to raise completeness.

Replace vague buzzwords like 'AI-powered tools' and 'modern developer experience practices' with concrete actions such as 'document OAuth flows' or 'generate code examples'.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists several concrete actions ("Create interactive docs, generate SDKs, and build comprehensive developer portals"), matching the several-specific-actions anchor; buzzword padding ("AI-powered tools, and modern developer experience practices") keeps it below comprehensive and clean.

4 / 5

Completeness

The "what" is clear (master API documentation, create interactive docs, generate SDKs, build portals) but there is no "Use when..." clause or equivalent trigger guidance in the description, capping completeness at 3 per the rubric guideline.

3 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural keyword coverage ("API documentation", "OpenAPI 3.1", "SDKs", "developer portals", "interactive docs") that users would actually say, though common variations like "Swagger", "REST API", "API spec", or "developer docs" are missing.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The API-documentation/OpenAPI/SDK niche is mostly distinct with clear triggers; only minor overlap risk with closely related technical-writing or web-development skills.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

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.

Validation — 15 / 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

administrakt0r/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills

Path

plugins/AI-Agents-Safe-Coding-Skills/skills/api-documenter/SKILL.md

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.