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.

Quality

32%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

Pending

No eval scenarios have been run

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./docs/v19.7/configuration/agent/skills_external/antigravity-awesome-skills-main/skills/api-testing-observability-api-mock/SKILL.md

Quality

Discovery

22%

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 description uses second person voice ('You are') which violates the style guidelines, and reads more like a persona prompt than a skill description. It lacks concrete actions, explicit trigger conditions, and natural user keywords. The description would struggle to differentiate itself in a large skill library.

Suggestions

Rewrite in third person voice describing capabilities (e.g., 'Creates mock API endpoints, generates realistic response data, simulates error conditions and latency')

Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms like 'mock API', 'stub endpoint', 'fake server', 'API testing', 'parallel development'

List specific concrete actions such as 'define mock endpoints', 'configure response schemas', 'simulate authentication flows', 'generate sample payloads'

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Uses vague language like 'realistic mock services' and 'simulate real API behavior' without listing concrete actions. No specific capabilities like 'create mock endpoints', 'generate response schemas', or 'configure latency simulation' are mentioned.	1 / 3
Completeness	Describes a general 'what' (API mocking) but lacks any explicit 'when' clause or trigger guidance. No 'Use when...' statement is present, and the use cases mentioned (development, testing, demos) are too vague to serve as triggers.	1 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Contains some relevant keywords ('API mocking', 'mock services', 'development', 'testing', 'demos') but misses common variations users might say like 'stub', 'fake API', 'mock server', 'API simulation', or specific tools/formats.	2 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The 'API mocking' focus provides some distinction, but terms like 'development' and 'testing' are generic and could overlap with many other skills. Could conflict with general API skills, testing skills, or development workflow skills.	2 / 3
	Total	6 / 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 has good structure and appropriate progressive disclosure, but critically lacks actionable content. The instructions are abstract directives rather than concrete guidance, and there are no code examples, specific commands, or executable snippets. The skill essentially tells Claude to 'do mocking things' without showing how.

Suggestions

Add at least one concrete, executable code example showing a basic mock server setup (e.g., using MSW, WireMock, or a simple Express mock)

Replace abstract instructions like 'Clarify the API contract' with specific actions like 'Ask for OpenAPI spec or request/response examples'

Include a minimal working example of a mock route with request/response shapes

Remove the redundant 'Context' section since it repeats information from the description and 'Use this skill when' sections

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The skill is reasonably efficient but includes some unnecessary framing ('You are an API mocking expert...') and context sections that could be trimmed. The 'Use this skill when' and 'Do not use this skill when' sections add value but the 'Context' section is redundant.	2 / 3
Actionability	The skill provides only abstract guidance ('Clarify the API contract', 'Define mock routes') without any concrete code examples, specific commands, or executable snippets. There's no copy-paste ready content - just vague directives.	1 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Instructions are listed as bullet points suggesting a sequence, but there are no explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops. The workflow lacks specificity about what 'clarify' or 'define' actually means in practice.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	The skill appropriately keeps the overview concise and references a single external resource (implementation-playbook.md) for detailed code samples and templates. This is well-structured one-level-deep disclosure.	3 / 3
	Total	8 / 12 Passed

Validation

100%

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 — 11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: duclm1x1/Dive-Ai
Commit: 20ba150

Reviewed: 27 days 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.