CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo
SkillPublic

api-contract-testing

Verifies API contracts between services using consumer-driven contracts, schema validation, and tools like Pact. Use when testing microservices communication, preventing breaking changes, or validating OpenAPI specifications.

63

Quality

79%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide
SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugins/api-contract-testing/skills/api-contract-testing/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

65%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 delivers solid executable code and exemplary progressive disclosure with real, well-organized reference files. Its weaknesses are an unnecessary key-concepts table that pads tokens and an implicit workflow that never explicitly sequences the consumer-to-provider verification pipeline.

Suggestions

Remove or drastically cut the 'Key Concepts' table — these are concepts Claude already knows.

Add a short numbered workflow (write consumer test → publish to broker → run provider verification → gate deploy on verification result) so the multi-service sequence is explicit.

Complete the provider verification example by importing or stubbing 'db' and 'app' so both snippets are fully copy-paste runnable.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The code sections are tight, but the 'Key Concepts' table explains terms (Consumer, Provider, Contract, Schema, Broker) Claude already knows, and the Best Practices/Tools lists are partly generic — more than minor trimming needed, so below the 4 anchor.

3 / 5

Actionability

The PactV3 consumer test, Verifier setup, and express-openapi-validator middleware are complete, executable TypeScript/JavaScript with realistic matchers and state handlers; minor gaps (undefined 'db' and 'app' contexts) keep it below copy-paste-ready 5.

4 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The consumer-test → provider-verification → CI pipeline sequence is implied by section order and the Pact Broker reference, but never stated as explicit numbered steps, and no validation checkpoints (e.g., 'only deploy when verification passes') appear in the body.

3 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

Core Pact and OpenAPI examples are inline, while additional implementations (Python, Java, Broker CI/CD) are cleanly offloaded to three real, well-signaled, one-level-deep reference files — all verified to exist in the bundle.

5 / 5

Total

15

/

20

Passed

Description

83%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.

A strong description: third-person voice, concrete capabilities, and an explicit 'Use when' clause with natural trigger phrases. It sits just below top marks on specificity and trigger coverage due to a few generic phrasings and missing synonyms.

Suggestions

Name the additional concrete capabilities directly (e.g., 'publishes and verifies contracts via a Pact Broker') instead of the generic 'tools like Pact'.

Add one or two common user synonyms such as 'integration testing' or 'API compatibility' to the trigger clause.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Lists several specific actions — 'verifies API contracts', 'consumer-driven contracts, schema validation', 'validating OpenAPI specifications' — with minor gaps; 'tools like Pact' is slightly generic, keeping it below the comprehensive 5 anchor.

4 / 5

Completeness

Clearly answers 'what' (verifies API contracts via consumer-driven contracts, schema validation, Pact) and 'when' with an explicit 'Use when' clause listing three concrete trigger scenarios.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Good natural keyword coverage ('testing microservices communication', 'preventing breaking changes', 'OpenAPI specifications', 'Pact'), but a few common synonyms users might say (e.g., 'API testing', 'schema', 'integration tests') are missing.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Contract testing is a distinct niche with clear triggers, but phrases like 'schema validation' and 'preventing breaking changes' carry minor overlap risk with general API-testing or schema-validation skills.

4 / 5

Total

17

/

20

Passed

Validation

100%

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

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository

secondsky/claude-skills

Path

plugins/api-contract-testing/skills/api-contract-testing/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.