703-technologies-fuzzing-testing

Use when you need to add or review fuzz testing for Java APIs with CATS — including contract-driven negative testing, malformed payload validation, boundary input exploration, CI integration, reproducible failures, and local execution guidance. This should trigger for requests such as Add fuzz testing to a Java project; Use CATS for API negative testing; Review CI quality gates for API contract robustness; Improve boundary and malformed input test coverage; Run CATS fuzz tests against an OpenAPI contract. Part of Plinth Toolkit

Quality

73%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/703-technologies-fuzzing-testing/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

57%

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

A well-structured overview with sound progressive disclosure and useful validation constraints, but the inline workflow steps are generic and the 'When to use' list duplicates the description. Concrete execution detail is appropriately deferred to the reference and bundle files.

Suggestions

Replace the generic workflow steps with concrete sequenced actions that fold in the compile/stop/verify checkpoints, rather than separating them into a Constraints block.

Remove the 'When to use this skill' section or replace it with a one-line pointer, since its bullets duplicate the description's triggers.

Inline at least one minimal end-to-end CATS invocation example in the body so the core action is actionable without opening the reference.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly lean, but the 'When to use this skill' section verbatim-duplicates the five trigger bullets already in the description, adding redundant tokens.	2 / 3
Actionability	Concrete copy-paste commands are present ('./mvnw compile', './mvnw clean verify', './run-cats-fuzz.sh --openapi <path>'), but the executable fuzzing logic itself is delegated to bundle files rather than shown inline.	2 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Validation checkpoints exist (MANDATORY compile, STOP on failure, VERIFY after) but live in a separate Constraints section, while the four workflow steps are generic ('Apply technology-aligned changes') rather than concrete sequenced actions.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	A clear overview points one level deep to a real references/ file plus scripts/ and assets/ bundles, all clearly signaled and verified present on disk.	3 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 Passed

Description

90%

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A strong, specific description with explicit triggers covering both what and when, narrowly scoped to CATS-based Java API fuzz testing. Its only weakness is second-person phrasing ('you need to') rather than the recommended third-person imperative voice.

Suggestions

Rewrite in third-person imperative voice (e.g. 'Use when adding or reviewing fuzz testing...') instead of 'Use when you need to' to satisfy the rubric's voice requirement.

Drop the trailing 'Part of Plinth Toolkit' fragment or integrate it more meaningfully, as it adds no trigger value.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Lists many concrete actions (negative testing, malformed payload validation, boundary exploration, CI integration, reproducible failures), but the second-person voice 'Use when you need to' triggers the rubric's -1 specificity penalty.	2 / 3
Completeness	Clearly answers both what (enumerated fuzz-testing capabilities) and when, with an explicit 'Use when...' clause and a 'This should trigger for requests such as...' list.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Provides explicit natural trigger phrases a user would say, e.g. 'Add fuzz testing to a Java project', 'Use CATS for API negative testing', 'Run CATS fuzz tests against an OpenAPI contract'.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	A named tool (CATS) scoped to Java/OpenAPI contract fuzzing gives it a clear niche unlikely to trigger for unrelated skills.	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: jabrena/cursor-rules-java
Path: skills/703-technologies-fuzzing-testing/SKILL.md
Commit: fdaf68c

Reviewed: 1 day 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.