Name: apideck
Rating: 62.4 (1 reviews)
Author: membranedev

apideck

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

Quality

74%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Low

Low-risk findings worth noting

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/apideck/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

82%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 tightly written, highly actionable guide with concrete commands and strong validation feedback loops for the connection lifecycle. Its main gaps are a dangling 'Step 2' reference and the absence of any progressive disclosure into separate reference files.

Suggestions

Fix the dangling 'Skip to Step 2' cross-reference by either labeling the searching/running-actions sections as 'Step 2' or rewording to 'skip to Searching for actions'.

Move the detailed clientAction state-handling and the proxy flag reference table into a separate REFERENCE.md linked from the main flow to improve progressive disclosure.

Trim the introductory paragraph explaining what Apideck is, since Claude can treat it as a known SaaS integration platform.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is largely lean and command-driven with copy-pasteable shell snippets, but includes minor over-explanation such as 'Apideck is a unified API platform...' and 'so you can focus on the integration logic rather than auth plumbing' that could be trimmed, placing it at level 4 rather than 5.	4 / 5
Actionability	It provides fully executable, copy-paste-ready commands for every stage (install, login, connection ensure, action list/run with JSON input, proxy request with a flags table), covering the common cases comprehensively.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The install -> login -> connection ensure -> poll-for-state -> search -> run sequence is clear with explicit polling/validation feedback loops (wait for READY, handle CLIENT_ACTION_REQUIRED, re-poll), but the dangling 'Skip to Step 2' reference has no matching 'Step 2' header, a minor sequencing gap that keeps it below 5.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Content is well-organized into clearly headed sections with no bundle files to reference, but all reference-grade detail (the clientAction schema, proxy flag table) is inlined in a single ~155-line file rather than split into one-level-deep references, so it does not reach the level 5 'clear overview pointing to detailed materials' anchor.	4 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Description

66%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 is concise, uses correct third-person voice, and provides an explicit 'Use when' trigger tied to a distinct brand name. Its main weakness is generic, non-comprehensive action wording and limited trigger-term variation.

Suggestions

Replace the generic 'Manage data, records, and automate workflows' with more concrete Apideck-specific actions (e.g., 'query CRM leads, list accounting invoices, sync e-commerce orders').

Broaden the trigger clause with natural phrasings users would say, e.g., 'Use when the user wants to query, create, or sync records in Apideck-connected apps like CRM, accounting, or e-commerce.'

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the Apideck domain plus a few actions ('Manage data, records, and automate workflows') but the actions are generic and not comprehensive, matching the 'names domain and 1-2 concrete actions' anchor rather than the more detailed level 4.	3 / 5
Completeness	It states both what ('Manage data, records, and automate workflows') and an explicit when ('Use when the user wants to interact with Apideck data'), but the when could be more specific with concrete trigger phrases, so it sits at level 4 rather than 5.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	The natural keyword 'Apideck' appears and 'interact with Apideck data' is a reasonable trigger phrase, but common variations or synonyms are missing, fitting the 'some relevant keywords but missing variations' anchor.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	'Apideck integration' carves a clear niche around a specific brand with a distinct trigger term, giving minimal conflict risk with other skills.	5 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Validation

93%

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 — 15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
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/apideck/SKILL.md
Commit: f484c82

Reviewed: 3 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.