apollo-local-dev-loop

Configure Apollo.io local development workflow. Use when setting up development environment, testing API calls locally, or establishing team development practices. Trigger with phrases like "apollo local dev", "apollo development setup", "apollo dev environment", "apollo testing locally".

Quality

82%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Quality

Content

65%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

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

The content is highly actionable with complete, executable, endpoint-accurate code and a clear step sequence, but it is verbose for an overview, omits explicit validation checkpoints for credit-consuming live tests, and leaves its one bundle reference orphaned.

Suggestions

Reference references/implementation-guide.md from the body (e.g., a '## Advanced setup' link) so the existing bundle file is discoverable, and move the full MSW handler set or dev-client there to slim the SKILL.md body.

Add an explicit validation checkpoint before any live/sandbox-off testing: instruct users to run `npm run apollo:check` and only proceed to `test:live` when auth verification passes.

Tighten the body by replacing full inline file dumps with the essential snippet plus a pointer to the complete file, reducing token cost while keeping it copy-paste ready.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly efficient with little concept padding, but ~215 lines of full inline file implementations (entire dev-client, five MSW handlers, server, vitest config, test, package.json) could be tightened or moved to referenced files, so it stops short of the lean score-3 bar.	2 / 3
Actionability	Every step ships complete, executable, endpoint-accurate code (axios client with interceptors, MSW handlers matching real Apollo routes, vitest config, runnable test, npm scripts), making it copy-paste ready per the score-3 anchor.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Five clearly sequenced steps with an Output summary and error table give a clear sequence, but live (sandbox-off) testing can consume real credits and the steps lack an explicit validate-then-proceed checkpoint, capping at 2 per the destructive/batch-operations guideline.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	Sections are organized, but a bundle file references/implementation-guide.md exists and is never referenced or signaled from the body, and full implementations that could be split out are inline, matching the score-2 anchor of references present but not clearly signaled.	2 / 3
	Total	9 / 12 Passed

Description

100%Weight 40%Scale 1-3

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 is strong: it names concrete actions, provides explicit natural-language triggers, answers both what and when, and occupies a clearly distinct Apollo.io niche. Voice is appropriately imperative/third-person with no first/second-person phrasing.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	"Configure Apollo.io local development workflow" plus "setting up development environment, testing API calls locally, or establishing team development practices" lists multiple concrete actions, matching the score-3 anchor rather than the partial score-2 anchor.	3 / 3
Completeness	It explicitly states what the skill does ("Configure Apollo.io local development workflow") and when to use it via an explicit "Use when..." clause plus triggers, satisfying both halves of the score-3 anchor.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	It supplies four natural trigger phrases users would actually say ("apollo local dev", "apollo development setup", "apollo dev environment", "apollo testing locally"), giving good coverage per the score-3 anchor.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The Apollo.io niche with Apollo-specific trigger phrases is a clear, distinct domain unlikely to conflict with other skills, matching the score-3 anchor rather than the generic score-2 anchor.	3 / 3
	Total	12 / 12 Passed

Validation

87%

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 — 14 / 16 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	14 / 16 Passed

Repository: jeremylongshore/claude-code-plugins-plus-skills
Path: plugins/saas-packs/apollo-pack/skills/apollo-local-dev-loop/SKILL.md
Commit: 0540a62

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.