api-test-generator
Api Test Generator - Auto-activating skill for Test Automation. Triggers on: api test generator, api test generator Part of the Test Automation skill category.
36
3%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
99%
0.99xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./planned-skills/generated/09-test-automation/api-test-generator/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
7%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 is essentially a label with no substantive content. It fails to describe concrete capabilities, lacks natural trigger terms users would use, and provides no explicit guidance on when Claude should select this skill. It reads as auto-generated boilerplate rather than a useful skill description.
Suggestions
Add specific concrete actions the skill performs, e.g., 'Generates API test cases, creates request/response assertions, builds test suites for REST and GraphQL endpoints.'
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms, e.g., 'Use when the user asks to generate API tests, write endpoint test cases, create integration tests, or test REST/GraphQL APIs.'
Remove the duplicated trigger term and expand with natural variations users would say, such as 'API tests', 'endpoint testing', 'REST tests', 'test automation for APIs', '.http files'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description names a domain ('API test generator', 'Test Automation') but provides no concrete actions. There is no mention of what specific tasks it performs—e.g., generating test cases, creating mock endpoints, validating responses, etc. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The description fails to answer 'what does this do' beyond a label, and there is no explicit 'when should Claude use it' clause. The 'Triggers on' line is just a repeated keyword, not meaningful guidance. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | The only trigger terms listed are 'api test generator' repeated twice. It misses natural variations users would say such as 'API tests', 'endpoint testing', 'REST test', 'integration tests', 'test cases for API', etc. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The phrase 'API test generator' is somewhat specific to a niche (API testing), which reduces conflict with unrelated skills. However, the lack of detail means it could still overlap with general testing or code generation skills. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 5 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
0%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is an empty shell with no substantive content. It consists entirely of generic boilerplate that repeats the phrase 'api test generator' without providing any actual guidance, code examples, tool configurations, or workflows for generating API tests. It fails on every dimension of the rubric.
Suggestions
Add concrete, executable code examples showing API test generation (e.g., a pytest example testing a REST endpoint with requests/httpx, or a Jest example with supertest).
Define a clear workflow: 1) Analyze the API endpoint/spec, 2) Generate test scaffolding, 3) Add assertions for status codes/response schemas, 4) Validate tests run successfully.
Include specific patterns for common scenarios: mocking external services, testing authentication, validating response schemas, handling error cases.
Remove all generic boilerplate ('This skill provides automated assistance...') and replace with actionable content that assumes Claude's competence.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is entirely filler and boilerplate. It explains nothing Claude doesn't already know, repeats 'api test generator' excessively, and provides zero substantive information about how to actually generate API tests. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | There are no concrete code examples, commands, specific frameworks, patterns, or executable guidance of any kind. Every section is vague and abstract, describing what the skill does rather than instructing how to do it. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | No workflow, steps, or process is defined. The mention of 'step-by-step guidance' is a claim without any actual steps provided. There are no validation checkpoints or sequenced instructions. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is a flat, uninformative page with no references to detailed materials, no linked files, and no meaningful structure beyond generic section headers that contain no real content. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Validation
81%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 9 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
allowed_tools_field | 'allowed-tools' contains unusual tool name(s) | Warning |
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
Total | 9 / 11 Passed | |
- Commit
3076d78
- 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.