request-body-validator
Request Body Validator - Auto-activating skill for API Development. Triggers on: request body validator, request body validator Part of the API Development skill category.
36
Quality
3%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
97%
1.00xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./planned-skills/generated/15-api-development/request-body-validator/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 placeholder that provides almost no useful information for skill selection. It repeats the skill name as trigger terms, lacks any concrete actions or capabilities, and provides no guidance on when Claude should select this skill. The description would be indistinguishable from dozens of potential API-related skills.
Suggestions
Add specific concrete actions the skill performs, e.g., 'Validates request payloads against JSON schemas, checks required fields, validates data types, and reports validation errors with line numbers'
Replace the redundant trigger terms with natural variations users would say: 'validate request', 'check payload', 'API input validation', 'JSON schema validation', 'request data'
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause describing scenarios: 'Use when validating API request bodies, checking JSON payloads against schemas, or debugging malformed request data'
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description only names the skill ('Request Body Validator') without describing any concrete actions. There are no specific capabilities listed like 'validates JSON schemas', 'checks required fields', or 'reports validation errors'. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The description fails to answer 'what does this do' beyond the name itself, and provides no explicit 'when to use' guidance. The 'Triggers on' section just repeats the skill name rather than describing use cases. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | The trigger terms are redundant ('request body validator' repeated twice) and overly specific/technical. Missing natural variations users would say like 'validate payload', 'check request data', 'API validation', 'JSON schema', or 'input validation'. | 1 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The term 'Request Body Validator' is somewhat specific to API development context, but 'API Development skill category' is generic and could overlap with many other API-related skills. Without concrete actions, it's unclear how this differs from general API validation tools. | 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 essentially a placeholder with no actionable content. It describes what a request body validator skill would do in abstract terms but provides no actual validation schemas, code examples, library recommendations, or implementation guidance. The content fails on all dimensions by being verbose yet empty of substance.
Suggestions
Add concrete code examples showing request body validation using a specific library (e.g., Zod, Joi, JSON Schema, Pydantic)
Include example validation schemas for common patterns (user registration, API payloads) with expected input/output
Define a clear workflow: 1) Define schema, 2) Validate incoming request, 3) Handle validation errors with specific error response format
Remove all generic boilerplate text ('provides automated assistance', 'follows industry best practices') and replace with executable guidance
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is padded with generic boilerplate that provides no actual value. Phrases like 'provides automated assistance' and 'follows industry best practices' are vague filler that Claude doesn't need. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | There is zero concrete guidance - no code examples, no validation schemas, no specific commands. The skill describes what it does rather than instructing how to do anything. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | No workflow is defined at all. For a request body validator skill, there should be clear steps for defining schemas, validating inputs, and handling validation errors - none of which are present. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The content is a monolithic block of generic text with no structure pointing to detailed materials. There are no references to schema examples, validation libraries, or error handling patterns. | 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
0c08951
- 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.