jira
Jira integration via Apideck's Issue Tracking unified API — same methods work across every connector in Issue Tracking, switch by changing `serviceId`. Use when the user wants to read, write, or comment on tickets and issues in Jira. Routes through Apideck with serviceId "jira".
83
81%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
—
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Quality
Discovery
89%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 is a solid skill description that clearly identifies its niche (Jira via Apideck), provides explicit trigger guidance, and is distinctive enough to avoid conflicts. Its main weakness is that the specific capabilities listed are somewhat general ('read, write, or comment') rather than enumerating more granular actions like creating issues, updating statuses, or searching tickets.
Suggestions
Expand the capability list with more specific actions such as 'create issues, update fields, transition statuses, search tickets, add attachments' to improve specificity.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (Jira integration via Apideck) and mentions some actions ('read, write, or comment on tickets and issues'), but doesn't list comprehensive specific actions like creating issues, updating fields, searching, assigning, transitioning statuses, etc. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (Jira integration via Apideck's unified API for reading, writing, commenting on tickets/issues) and 'when' (explicit 'Use when the user wants to read, write, or comment on tickets and issues in Jira'). Has an explicit trigger clause. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural keywords users would say: 'Jira', 'tickets', 'issues', 'comment', 'read', 'write'. Also includes technical identifiers like 'serviceId' and 'Apideck' that help with routing. These are terms users would naturally use when requesting Jira-related work. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive — specifically targets Jira via Apideck with serviceId 'jira', mentions the Issue Tracking unified API, and clearly scopes to Jira tickets/issues. Unlikely to conflict with other skills unless there's another Jira-specific skill. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
72%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a solid connector-specific skill with excellent actionability through executable examples and a comprehensive entity mapping table. Its main weaknesses are moderate verbosity (marketing language, repeated portability messaging) and lack of explicit validation/verification steps in workflows. The progressive disclosure and reference structure are well done.
Suggestions
Remove the 'Portable across 6 Issue Tracking connectors' section or reduce it to a single sentence — the portability point is already made in the intro and the sibling connectors section.
Trim the 'When to use this skill' section to 1-2 lines; Claude doesn't need to be told what the skill teaches it.
Add a brief validation step to the create-ticket example (e.g., check response status, verify ticket.id is returned) to improve workflow clarity for write operations.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill contains useful Jira-specific information (entity mapping, quirks, auth notes) but is verbose in places — the 'Portable across 6 connectors' section repeats the portability pitch from the intro, the 'When to use this skill' section over-explains activation criteria, and the marketing language ('compounding advantage') wastes tokens. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable TypeScript examples for listing tickets, creating a bug with labels, transitioning status, and a curl command for JQL proxy search. The entity mapping table and coverage checklist give concrete, specific guidance for what works and what requires fallback. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Individual operations are clear, but there's no explicit multi-step workflow with validation checkpoints. For example, creating a ticket doesn't mention verifying the collectionId exists first, and the proxy fallback pattern lacks error handling steps. The coverage table partially compensates by signaling what requires fallback. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-structured with clear sections (quick facts, examples, entity mapping, coverage, auth notes) and one-level-deep references to SDK skills, OpenAPI specs, best practices, and connector coverage. Navigation is easy and references are clearly signaled with links. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Validation
81%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 9 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
metadata_field | 'metadata' should map string keys to string values | Warning |
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 9 / 11 Passed | |
- Repository
- apideck-libraries/api-skills
- Commit
9e04d86
- 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.