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.

1.19x

Quality

61%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

86%

1.19x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

Securityby

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-testing-observability-api-mock/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is api-testing-observability-api-mock in rmyndharis/antigravity-skills

Quality

Content

61%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 skill body is well-organized and token-efficient, pointing to a single bundled playbook for detail. It is held back by directive-only instructions with no executable examples and no validation checkpoints, and by a referenced bundle file that is missing from the package.

Suggestions

Ship the referenced `resources/implementation-playbook.md` so the body's pointer resolves to real content, or remove the dangling reference.

Add at least one concrete, executable example (e.g., a minimal mock-server snippet or a command to run it) to lift actionability above directive-only guidance.

Insert a validation checkpoint in the workflow (e.g., verify generated mocks against the contract before documenting them) to address the missing feedback loop.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and well-sectioned with only minor redundancy — the opening sentence and 'Context' section restate the frontmatter description, which could be trimmed — fitting the 'efficient; minor instances of over-explanation' anchor.	4 / 5
Actionability	Instructions name specific topics (contract, auth flows, error shapes, state transitions, deterministic fixtures) but give no executable code, commands, or concrete examples, leaving the guidance directive rather than copy-paste ready.	3 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A rough sequence is present (clarify contract -> define routes/scenarios/state -> fixtures -> document running/scenarios) but there are no validation checkpoints or feedback loops, matching the anchor for steps listed with validation gaps.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Structure is clean and the detailed playbook is one level deep and clearly signaled, but the referenced `resources/implementation-playbook.md` does not exist in the bundle, which is a minor navigation gap that keeps it below a 5.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 20 Passed

Description

61%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 clearly identifies a niche and uses reasonably natural trigger terms, but it lacks an explicit 'Use when' clause and only states one or two concrete actions, which caps both completeness and specificity at the midpoint.

Suggestions

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause naming concrete triggers (e.g., 'Use when building mock APIs for frontend/integration testing, simulating third-party APIs, or creating demo environments').

Expand the action list beyond 'design mocks' and 'simulate real API behavior' to more specific capabilities (define mock routes, scenarios, state transitions, fixtures) for higher specificity.

Include common synonyms users might say ('stub', 'fake API', 'API sandbox') to broaden trigger coverage.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The description names the domain ('API mocking') and a couple of concrete actions ('Design mocks that simulate real API behavior and enable parallel development'), but the action list is not comprehensive enough to reach anchor 4.	3 / 5
Completeness	It clearly states the 'what' (designing realistic mock services) but offers no explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause; per the rubric a missing explicit trigger caps completeness at 3, and anchor 3 is the best fit.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Natural terms like 'mock services', 'API mocking', 'mocks', and 'development, testing, and demos' give good keyword coverage, though a few synonyms (stub, fake API) are missing.	4 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The API-mocking niche is fairly distinct with clear triggers, carrying only minor overlap risk with general API/testing skills.	4 / 5
	Total	14 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

Warnings & errors only

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

Criteria	Description	Result
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-testing-observability-api-mock/SKILL.md
Commit: 900c504

Reviewed: 7 hours ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.