myob-acumatica
MYOB Acumatica integration via Apideck's Accounting unified API — same methods work across every connector in Accounting, switch by changing `serviceId`. Use when the user wants to read, write, or reconcile invoices, bills, payments, ledger accounts, and journal entries in MYOB Acumatica. Routes through Apideck with serviceId "myob-acumatica".
87
86%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
—
No eval scenarios have been run
Advisory
Suggest reviewing before use
Quality
Discovery
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.
This is a strong skill description that clearly identifies the specific integration (MYOB Acumatica via Apideck), lists concrete accounting operations, and provides an explicit 'Use when' clause with natural trigger terms. The description is concise, uses third-person voice, and is highly distinguishable from other skills due to the specific product and serviceId references.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: 'read, write, or reconcile invoices, bills, payments, ledger accounts, and journal entries'. Also mentions the unified API pattern and serviceId switching mechanism. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (MYOB Acumatica integration via Apideck's Accounting unified API for invoices, bills, payments, etc.) and 'when' ('Use when the user wants to read, write, or reconcile invoices, bills, payments, ledger accounts, and journal entries in MYOB Acumatica'). | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural keywords users would say: 'MYOB Acumatica', 'invoices', 'bills', 'payments', 'ledger accounts', 'journal entries', 'reconcile', 'Apideck', and 'Accounting'. These cover the terms a user working with this integration would naturally use. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive due to the specific product name 'MYOB Acumatica', the serviceId 'myob-acumatica', and the Apideck routing context. This would not conflict with generic accounting skills or other connector-specific skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 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 well-structured connector skill with strong actionability and excellent progressive disclosure to related resources. Its main weaknesses are moderate verbosity from repeated portability messaging and marketing language, and a lack of explicit validation/error-handling workflows that would be especially important given the beta status of this connector.
Suggestions
Remove or consolidate the 'Portable across 34 Accounting connectors' section — the portability point is already made in the intro paragraph; the code example showing serviceId swapping could be folded into the minimal example.
Add a brief error-handling/validation workflow: check coverage programmatically, handle 403s and unsupported-resource errors, and show when to fall back to the Proxy API — especially important for a beta connector with known gaps.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill contains some unnecessary verbosity — the 'Portable across 34 Accounting connectors' section repeats the portability pitch already stated in the intro, and the 'When to use this skill' section over-explains when activation is appropriate. The entity mapping table and coverage highlights are valuable, but the marketing-style language ('compounding advantage') wastes tokens. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable TypeScript examples for listing invoices, filtering by status, and using the Proxy API escape hatch with a complete curl command. The entity mapping table gives concrete resource names, and the serviceId is clearly specified throughout. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The skill covers individual operations well but lacks validation checkpoints — there's no guidance on verifying API responses, handling errors/403s beyond mentioning they surface transparently, or a workflow for checking coverage before attempting operations. For a beta connector where 'partial resource coverage and occasional mapping gaps' are expected, explicit verify-then-act workflows would be important. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Excellent progressive disclosure with a clear overview in the SKILL.md, well-signaled references to SDK skills, OpenAPI specs, best practices, and connector coverage tools. All references are one level deep and clearly labeled with descriptive link text. | 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.