api-design-principles
Master REST and GraphQL API design principles to build intuitive, scalable, and maintainable APIs that delight developers. Use when designing new APIs, reviewing API specifications, or establishing...
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:boisenoise/skills-collections --skill api-design-principles60
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillValidation for skill structure
Discovery
75%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 has good structure with an explicit 'Use when' clause and targets a clear niche (API design). However, it relies on vague aspirational language ('delight developers', 'intuitive, scalable') rather than concrete actions, and appears to be truncated which limits its effectiveness. The trigger terms are adequate but could include more natural variations.
Suggestions
Replace aspirational language with concrete actions like 'Define resource endpoints, design request/response schemas, establish versioning strategies, create error handling patterns'
Add more natural trigger terms users might say: 'endpoints', 'routes', 'OpenAPI', 'swagger', 'API schema', 'RESTful'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (REST and GraphQL API design) and mentions some actions (designing, reviewing, establishing), but uses vague aspirational language like 'intuitive, scalable, and maintainable' and 'delight developers' rather than listing concrete specific actions. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what (API design principles for REST and GraphQL) and when (explicit 'Use when' clause covering designing new APIs, reviewing API specifications, or establishing...). Despite truncation, the structure is complete. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes relevant keywords like 'REST', 'GraphQL', 'API design', 'API specifications', but the description is truncated and may be missing common variations users might say like 'endpoints', 'routes', 'schema', 'OpenAPI', or 'swagger'. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Clear niche focusing specifically on API design principles for REST and GraphQL, with distinct triggers that wouldn't easily conflict with general coding skills or other document-related skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
35%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill content is too abstract and defers nearly all actionable guidance to an external file. While it maintains good structure and brevity, it fails to provide any concrete examples, code patterns, or specific API design guidance that Claude could immediately apply. The skill reads more like a table of contents than a useful reference.
Suggestions
Add at least one concrete REST API design example showing resource naming, HTTP methods, and response structure
Include a specific GraphQL schema example demonstrating type definitions and query patterns
Provide concrete error response formats and status code mappings rather than just mentioning 'specify errors'
Add a quick-reference checklist of API design principles inline, reserving the external file for deep-dive content
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is relatively brief but includes some unnecessary content like the verbose 'Use this skill when' and 'Do not use this skill when' sections that explain obvious contexts Claude could infer. The actual instructions are lean. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The instructions are extremely vague and abstract ('Define consumers, use cases, and constraints', 'Choose API style'). No concrete examples, code snippets, API schemas, or specific patterns are provided - everything is deferred to an external file. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | Steps are numbered and sequenced, but they are too high-level to be actionable. No validation checkpoints, no feedback loops, and no concrete guidance on what 'validate with examples' actually means in practice. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | References an external playbook file appropriately, but the SKILL.md itself provides almost no substantive content - it's essentially just a pointer to another file with minimal overview value. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
- 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.