CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

apicurio-registry

Apicurio integration. Manage data, records, and automate workflows. Use when the user wants to interact with Apicurio data.

Quality

69%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/apicurio-registry/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

67%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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

The body is a solid, command-driven integration guide with explicit connection-state checkpoints and a good proxy fallback, but it is held back by an unnecessary concept-explaining intro, a content-free API overview tree, and a dangling "Step 2" reference that breaks the workflow's coherence. Tightening the padding and fixing the step numbering plus one worked example would move it from good to excellent.

Suggestions

Delete or compress the opening concept paragraph ("Apicurio Registry is a distributed data store...") and the bare "Apicurio Overview" tree, which explain what Claude already knows and carry no actionable detail — at most keep the official docs link.

Fix the dangling navigation: "skip to **Step 2**" points to a step that is never defined and section "1b" has no "1a"/Step 1 — either number the workflow steps explicitly (1. connect, 2. discover actions, 3. run) or replace the cross-references with section names.

Add one end-to-end worked example (a real --intent query, the chosen action id, and the run command with sample --input) so the search-to-run path is fully executable, and fold the duplicate "Popular actions" section into "Searching for actions".

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The opening paragraph explains what Apicurio Registry is ("Apicurio Registry is a distributed data store for managing and sharing Apache Avro, JSON Schema, and Protobuf schemas... Developers and architects use it to centralize and standardize their schema definitions"), a concept Claude already knows, and the "Apicurio Overview" section is a bare tree of API area names with no detail, ending with the content-free line "Use action names and parameters as needed." This is more than minor trimming, so it fits anchor 3 (mostly efficient but includes some unnecessary explanation) rather than 4.

3 / 5

Actionability

Concrete, copy-paste-ready commands throughout: "npm install -g @membranehq/cli@latest", "membrane connection ensure \"https://www.apicur.io/\" --json", "membrane action run <actionId> --connectionId=CONNECTION_ID --input '{...}' --json", plus a complete proxy flag table. Not 5 because there is no worked example with a real action id or a filled-in --intent query, leaving a minor gap between search and run.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A clear sequence (install → login → connection ensure → poll state → search actions → run → proxy fallback) with explicit state-based checkpoints (READY / CLIENT_ACTION_REQUIRED with re-poll instructions / CONFIGURATION_ERROR), forming a genuine feedback loop for connection setup. Not 5 because "skip to **Step 2**" references a Step 2 that is never defined, the "1b" section has no corresponding numbered step, and there is no verification guidance after running an action or proxy request.

4 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

No bundle files exist (references/, scripts/, assets/ are all absent), so all content is inline in one SKILL.md and references are trivially one level deep. Section headers are clear and logical (Install / Authentication / Connecting / Searching / Running / Proxy / Best practices). Not 5 because the 145-line body exceeds the simple-skill case and has minor organization quirks: the "Popular actions" section merely repeats the search command, and the dangling "1b"/"Step 2" numbering confuses navigation.

4 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

57%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

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 names a distinct niche product and includes an explicit 'Use when' clause, so it answers both what and when, but it does so in generic terms. Replacing the vague "manage data, records, and automate workflows" with the skill's actual capabilities (schema and artifact management for Apicurio Registry) would lift specificity, trigger quality, and completeness simultaneously.

Suggestions

Replace the generic "Manage data, records, and automate workflows" with concrete Apicurio Registry capabilities, e.g. "Manage schema artifacts, versions, and artifact/global rules in Apicurio Registry (Avro, JSON Schema, Protobuf)."

Add the natural trigger terms users say for a schema registry — "schema registry", "artifacts", "Avro", "Protobuf", "JSON Schema" — to the 'Use when' clause, e.g. "Use when the user mentions Apicurio, schema registries, or managing Avro/Protobuf/JSON Schema artifacts."

Drop the buzzword "automate workflows", which adds no information and risks triggering on generic workflow-automation requests.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

"Manage data, records, and automate workflows" names the Apicurio domain but the actions are generic — no mention of schemas, artifacts, rules, groups, or API designs. This matches anchor 2 (names the domain but actions are minimal or generic), not 3, which requires at least 1-2 concrete actions like "manage schema artifacts" or "list artifact versions".

2 / 5

Completeness

Both halves are present: what ("Apicurio integration. Manage data, records, and automate workflows") and an explicit when ("Use when the user wants to interact with Apicurio data"). It is not 5 because the what is vague (no concrete capability named) and the when trigger is generic rather than listing concrete trigger phrases; it is not 3 because the 'Use when...' clause is explicit, so the completeness-at-3 cap does not apply.

4 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

"Apicurio" and "records" are relevant keywords, but the natural terms a schema-registry user would actually say — "schema", "registry", "artifact", "Avro", "Protobuf", "JSON Schema" — are entirely absent. Fits anchor 3 (some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms), not 4, because the coverage beyond the product name is thin and "data"/"workflows" are generic.

3 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

"Apicurio" is a clear niche product name repeated in both the what and the when clause, giving minimal conflict risk. Not 5 because the generic middle sentence ("Manage data, records, and automate workflows") creates minor overlap risk with generic data-management or database skills when the product name is absent from the user's phrasing.

4 / 5

Total

13

/

20

Passed

Validation

93%

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

frontmatter_unknown_keys

Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository

membranedev/application-skills

Path

skills/apicurio-registry/SKILL.md

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.