api-patterns
API design principles and decision-making. REST vs GraphQL vs tRPC selection, response formats, versioning, pagination.
55
44%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/antigravity-api-patterns/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
47%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 benefits from good keyword coverage with specific technology names that developers would naturally reference. However, it reads as a list of topics rather than concrete actions, and critically lacks any 'Use when...' guidance to help Claude know when to select this skill. Adding action verbs and explicit trigger conditions would significantly improve its effectiveness.
Suggestions
Add a 'Use when...' clause such as 'Use when the user asks about designing APIs, choosing between REST/GraphQL/tRPC, or needs guidance on API versioning, pagination, or response format decisions.'
Rewrite with action verbs to describe concrete capabilities, e.g., 'Guides API architecture decisions, evaluates tradeoffs between REST, GraphQL, and tRPC, designs pagination strategies, and recommends versioning approaches.'
Consider narrowing scope or adding boundary conditions to reduce overlap with general backend/architecture skills, e.g., specifying this is for greenfield API design decisions vs. implementation.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (API design) and lists several specific topics (REST vs GraphQL vs tRPC selection, response formats, versioning, pagination), but these read more like topic areas than concrete actions. No action verbs like 'design', 'evaluate', or 'implement' are used. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Describes 'what' at a topic level but completely lacks a 'Use when...' clause or any explicit trigger guidance for when Claude should select this skill. Per rubric guidelines, a missing 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 2, and the 'what' is also weak (topics rather than actions), warranting a 1. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural keywords users would say: 'API design', 'REST', 'GraphQL', 'tRPC', 'versioning', 'pagination', 'response formats'. These are terms developers naturally use when seeking API design guidance. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The mention of specific technologies (REST, GraphQL, tRPC) and specific concerns (versioning, pagination) provides some distinctiveness, but 'API design principles' is broad enough to potentially overlap with general backend development or architecture skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
42%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill functions primarily as a table of contents and navigation hub, which it does well via progressive disclosure. However, it severely lacks actionability—there are no concrete examples, code snippets, or executable guidance in the main file itself. The anti-patterns and checklist are too generic to be useful without at least brief inline examples demonstrating the right approach.
Suggestions
Add at least one concrete, executable example inline—e.g., a sample REST endpoint definition, a response envelope JSON schema, or a quick decision tree with specific criteria (team size, client types) rather than just 'choose based on context.'
Replace vague DO/DON'T items with specific examples: instead of 'Use appropriate status codes,' show a quick mapping like '201 for creation, 204 for deletion, 422 for validation errors.'
Remove the 'When to Use' section which adds no information, and trim the 'Selective Reading Rule' which is unnecessary meta-instruction.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is relatively lean and uses tables effectively, but includes some unnecessary filler like the 'Learn to THINK, not copy fixed patterns' tagline, the 'When to Use' section that says nothing, and the selective reading rule which is meta-instruction Claude doesn't need spelled out this way. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill body contains no concrete code, commands, examples, or executable guidance. It's entirely a table of contents and checklists with vague directives like 'Choose API style based on context' and 'Document thoroughly.' The actual actionable content is deferred entirely to sub-files with no inline examples. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The decision checklist provides a reasonable sequence of considerations before designing an API, but there are no validation checkpoints, no feedback loops, and no clear step-by-step workflow for actually executing API design. The checklist is more of a reminder list than a guided workflow. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content map table is well-structured with clear descriptions and 'When to Read' guidance for each sub-file. References are one level deep, clearly signaled, and organized for easy navigation. Related skills are also well-linked. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 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 | |
- Repository
- boisenoise/skills-collections
- Commit
636b862
- 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.