apollo-performance-tuning
Optimize Apollo.io API performance. Use when improving API response times, reducing latency, or optimizing bulk operations. Trigger with phrases like "apollo performance", "optimize apollo", "apollo slow", "apollo latency", "speed up apollo".
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:jeremylongshore/claude-code-plugins-plus-skills --skill apollo-performance-tuning82
Quality
77%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
93%
2.11xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./plugins/saas-packs/apollo-pack/skills/apollo-performance-tuning/SKILL.mdDiscovery
89%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 well-structured skill description with excellent trigger term coverage and clear 'when to use' guidance. The main weakness is the somewhat generic capability description - it mentions performance optimization goals but doesn't specify the concrete techniques or actions the skill provides. The explicit trigger phrases and Apollo.io specificity make it highly distinguishable.
Suggestions
Add specific concrete actions like 'implement request batching', 'configure rate limit handling', 'optimize pagination strategies', or 'reduce API call frequency' to improve specificity.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (Apollo.io API performance) and mentions some actions (improving response times, reducing latency, optimizing bulk operations), but lacks specific concrete actions like 'implement caching', 'batch requests', or 'configure rate limiting'. | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what (optimize Apollo.io API performance) and when (improving response times, reducing latency, optimizing bulk operations) with explicit trigger phrases listed. The 'Use when' and 'Trigger with' clauses are present and explicit. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural trigger terms users would say: 'apollo performance', 'optimize apollo', 'apollo slow', 'apollo latency', 'speed up apollo'. These are realistic phrases a user would naturally use when experiencing performance issues. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive with clear niche - specifically targets Apollo.io API performance optimization. The explicit Apollo-related trigger terms make it unlikely to conflict with general performance optimization or other API skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 11 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
64%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a solid, actionable skill with excellent executable code examples covering multiple performance optimization techniques. The main weaknesses are the length (could be more concise or split into referenced files) and the lack of explicit validation workflows to verify performance improvements after implementing each technique.
Suggestions
Add a validation workflow: 'Measure baseline latency -> Implement optimization -> Re-measure -> Compare against benchmarks table'
Consider moving detailed implementations (cache, metrics, pagination) to separate reference files, keeping SKILL.md as a concise overview with quick-start examples
Remove or condense the Grafana queries section - Claude can generate these from the metric definitions
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The skill is mostly efficient with good code examples, but includes some unnecessary elements like the Grafana queries section and verbose comments. The performance benchmarks table and checklist add value, but some explanatory text could be trimmed. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable TypeScript code with complete implementations for connection pooling, caching, batch processing, and monitoring. Code is copy-paste ready with proper imports and realistic configurations. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | While individual techniques are well-documented, there's no clear sequence for implementing these optimizations or validation steps to verify improvements. The checklist at the end helps but lacks explicit 'measure before/after' validation loops. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Content is well-organized with clear sections, but the skill is quite long (200+ lines) and could benefit from splitting detailed implementations into separate reference files. The 'Next Steps' reference to apollo-cost-tuning is good, but core content could be better distributed. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 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 | |
- 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.