702-technologies-wiremock
Use when you need framework-agnostic WireMock guidance — stub design, JSON or programmatic mappings, precise request matching, response bodies and faults, classpath fixtures, isolation and reset between tests, verification of calls, dynamic ports and base URLs, and avoiding flaky stubs — without choosing Spring Boot, Quarkus, or Micronaut. This should trigger for requests such as Design or review WireMock stubs (JSON mappings or Java DSL); Improve request matching, isolation, or reset strategy for HTTP mocks; Add or fix verification of outbound HTTP calls to a WireMock server; Debug flaky tests involving WireMock or unmatched request journals. Part of cursor-rules-java project
74
67%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
—
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/702-technologies-wiremock/SKILL.mdQuality
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 description that thoroughly covers specific WireMock capabilities, includes natural trigger terms users would use, explicitly states both what it does and when to use it, and clearly distinguishes itself from framework-specific skills. The only minor weakness is its length — it's quite verbose and could be slightly more concise — but the content quality is high across all dimensions.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: stub design, JSON/programmatic mappings, request matching, response bodies and faults, classpath fixtures, isolation and reset, verification of calls, dynamic ports and base URLs, and avoiding flaky stubs. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both 'what' (framework-agnostic WireMock guidance covering stub design, mappings, matching, etc.) and 'when' with explicit trigger scenarios ('This should trigger for requests such as...' followed by four concrete use cases). The 'Use when' clause is present at the very start. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes strong natural keywords users would say: 'WireMock', 'stubs', 'JSON mappings', 'Java DSL', 'request matching', 'HTTP mocks', 'flaky tests', 'unmatched request journals', 'verification'. These cover a wide range of natural user queries about WireMock. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive — explicitly scoped to WireMock (a specific HTTP mocking library) and explicitly excludes Spring Boot, Quarkus, and Micronaut framework-specific guidance, which clearly delineates it from related skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 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 functions primarily as a routing/delegation document rather than a standalone guide. It clearly defines scope boundaries and cross-references to framework-specific skills, which is well-structured. However, it critically lacks any concrete, actionable WireMock examples (no JSON mappings, no Java DSL snippets, no matching patterns), making it nearly useless without the referenced file. The workflow is generic and could apply to any technology skill.
Suggestions
Add at least 2-3 concrete, executable examples inline: a JSON mapping stub, a Java DSL stub with request matching, and a verification snippet — these should be copy-paste ready.
Make the workflow WireMock-specific: e.g., Step 1: register stubs, Step 2: configure dynamic port, Step 3: run test, Step 4: verify calls via `WireMock.verify()`, Step 5: check unmatched requests journal for debugging.
Remove the 'What is covered' bullet list which duplicates the 'When to use' section and the description — replace it with a quick-start code example that demonstrates the most common use case.
Add an explicit validation checkpoint for checking the unmatched requests journal (`/__admin/requests/unmatched`) as a debugging/feedback loop step.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill includes a 'What is covered' bullet list that largely restates the description and 'When to use' section, adding redundancy. The scope/delegation paragraph is useful but could be tighter. The constraints section is reasonably efficient but some items (like regenerating skills) are repo-maintenance concerns rather than WireMock guidance. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | There are no concrete code examples, no executable commands for WireMock stub creation, no JSON mapping examples, no Java DSL snippets, and no copy-paste ready guidance. The skill entirely delegates actionable content to a reference file without providing any inline examples of stub design, request matching, or verification. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The workflow has four numbered steps with a verification step at the end, but the steps are generic ('apply technology-aligned changes', 'gather scope') rather than WireMock-specific. There are no explicit validation checkpoints between steps (e.g., checking unmatched requests journal, verifying stub registrations). The edge case handling in constraints is a positive addition. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill references a detailed reference file and delegates to framework-specific skills, which is good structure. However, since no bundle files were provided, we cannot verify the reference file exists or contains adequate content. The SKILL.md itself provides almost no standalone value — it's essentially a pointer with no quick-start content inline, making it overly dependent on the reference. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%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
- jabrena/cursor-rules-java
- Commit
ef4eba3
- 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.