apollo-reference-architecture

Implement Apollo.io reference architecture. Use when designing Apollo integrations, establishing patterns, or building production-grade sales intelligence systems. Trigger with phrases like "apollo architecture", "apollo system design", "apollo integration patterns", "apollo best practices architecture".

Quality

—

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

—

No eval scenarios have been run

Securityby

Passed

No known issues

Quality

Content

65%

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 code and a clear step sequence, but it is held back by redundant inline material, the absence of validation feedback loops for batch/database operations, and an unreferenced implementation guide that overlaps with the inline content.

Suggestions

Add explicit validation/verification checkpoints to the build steps (e.g., lint/compile, test the enrichment endpoint against a known contact) and a retry-on-failure loop, since the skill performs batch and database operations.

Link references/implementation-guide.md from the body and move the duplicated architecture diagram and full service/job code there, keeping SKILL.md a concise overview that points one level deep.

Trim the redundant 'Output' section and drop one of the dual Prisma/TypeORM Contact model listings (reference the alternate ORM from the implementation guide instead).

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is mostly lean code, but the 'Output' section restates deliverables already shown in code, both Prisma and TypeORM versions of the Contact model are given in full, and there is light filler ('Apollo has a full Deals API for tracking revenue pipeline'); it could be tightened without losing clarity.	2 / 3
Actionability	Provides complete, copy-paste-ready TypeScript across services, BullMQ jobs, Prisma/TypeORM models, and Express routes, with real Apollo endpoints and concrete request/response shapes.	3 / 3
Workflow Clarity	Steps 1-6 give a clear sequence, but there are no explicit validation checkpoints or feedback loops, and the skill involves batch and database operations; per the rubric this caps workflow_clarity at 2.	2 / 3
Progressive Disclosure	A bundle file references/implementation-guide.md (468 lines) exists but is never linked or signaled from the body, and the SKILL.md duplicates architecture/service content inline rather than splitting it out, matching the anchor-2 case of content that should be separate being inline.	2 / 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.

The description is strong: it covers what and when explicitly, lists natural trigger phrases, and occupies a distinct niche. Its only weakness is that the stated actions are somewhat abstract ('designing', 'establishing patterns') rather than enumerating concrete capabilities.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the Apollo.io domain and some actions ('designing Apollo integrations, establishing patterns, or building production-grade sales intelligence systems'), but the verbs are high-level and abstract rather than listing multiple concrete capabilities; not as comprehensive as the anchor-3 example.	2 / 3
Completeness	Clearly answers both what ('Implement Apollo.io reference architecture') and when ('Use when designing Apollo integrations...') with an explicit 'Use when...' clause and trigger phrases.	3 / 3
Trigger Term Quality	Explicitly enumerates natural trigger phrases ('apollo architecture', 'apollo system design', 'apollo integration patterns', 'apollo best practices architecture') that a user would plausibly say, giving good coverage for this niche.	3 / 3
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Apollo.io is a specific SaaS product with niche-specific triggers, making this clearly distinguishable and unlikely to fire for unrelated skills.	3 / 3
	Total	11 / 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
Commit: 3022dd3

Reviewed: 2 days 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.