async-api-caller
Async Api Caller - Auto-activating skill for API Integration. Triggers on: async api caller, async api caller Part of the API Integration skill category.
32
0%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
90%
1.13xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./planned-skills/generated/16-api-integration/async-api-caller/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
0%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 placeholder with no substantive content. It fails on every dimension: it names no concrete actions, includes no natural trigger terms, provides no 'when to use' guidance, and is too generic to be distinguished from other API-related skills. It appears to be auto-generated boilerplate rather than a thoughtfully crafted skill description.
Suggestions
Describe specific concrete actions the skill performs, e.g., 'Makes asynchronous HTTP requests to REST APIs, handles pagination, retries on failure, and parses JSON/XML responses.'
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms, e.g., 'Use when the user needs to call an external API, fetch data from a URL, make HTTP GET/POST requests, or handle async API responses.'
Remove the duplicate trigger term and replace with varied natural language terms users would actually say, such as 'API call', 'HTTP request', 'fetch endpoint', 'REST API', 'async request', 'API response'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description contains no concrete actions whatsoever. 'Auto-activating skill for API Integration' is entirely vague and abstract—it doesn't describe what the skill actually does (e.g., making async HTTP requests, polling endpoints, handling callbacks). | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | Neither 'what does this do' nor 'when should Claude use it' is meaningfully answered. There is no 'Use when...' clause, and the 'what' is just a category label ('API Integration') rather than any description of capabilities. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | The only trigger terms listed are 'async api caller' repeated twice. These are not natural phrases a user would say; users would more likely say 'call an API', 'make an HTTP request', 'fetch data from endpoint', 'async request', etc. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | 'API Integration' is extremely generic and would conflict with any other skill involving APIs, HTTP requests, webhooks, or data fetching. Nothing distinguishes this from other potential API-related skills. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 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 placeholder with no actual instructional content. It consists entirely of generic boilerplate that describes what the skill could do without providing any concrete guidance, code examples, or workflows for async API calling. It fails on every dimension of the rubric.
Suggestions
Add concrete, executable code examples showing async API calling patterns (e.g., using aiohttp, httpx, or fetch with async/await) with real request/response examples.
Define a clear workflow for implementing async API calls: setup, making requests, handling responses, error handling/retries, and rate limiting with explicit validation steps.
Remove all meta-description sections ('When to Use', 'Example Triggers', 'Capabilities') and replace with actual technical content covering patterns like concurrent requests, retry logic, backoff strategies, and webhook handling.
Add references to advanced topics in separate files (e.g., PATTERNS.md for common async patterns, ERRORS.md for error handling strategies) to provide progressive disclosure.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is entirely filler and boilerplate. It explains nothing Claude doesn't already know, repeats 'async api caller' excessively, and provides zero technical substance. Every token is wasted on meta-description rather than actionable content. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | There is no concrete code, no commands, no specific examples, no API patterns, no executable guidance whatsoever. The skill describes what it could do rather than providing any actual instructions for performing async API calls. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | No workflow steps are defined. The 'Capabilities' section vaguely claims to provide step-by-step guidance but none is actually present. There are no sequences, no validation checkpoints, and no process to follow. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is a flat, repetitive structure with no references to detailed materials, no links to examples or advanced guides, and no meaningful organization beyond generic boilerplate headings. | 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
c8a915c
- 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.