CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

add-api-endpoint

Add an endpoint to the backend.

35

Quality

30%

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 ./review-plugin-creator/evals/derive-rubric-from-evidence/inputs/target-skill/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

36%

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

This skill is extremely thin and lacks any actionable detail. While it is concise, it crosses the line from efficient into unhelpfully vague—providing no code examples, no Fastify-specific patterns, no schema examples, and no concrete testing instructions. It reads more like a task checklist than a skill that teaches Claude how to perform the work.

Suggestions

Add a concrete, executable Fastify route handler example (e.g., a complete route file under `src/routes/` with request/response schema using Fastify's schema validation).

Specify how types should be kept in sync—e.g., whether to use TypeBox, JSON Schema, or generated types, with a concrete example.

Replace 'Test it' with specific testing guidance: a curl command, a test file example, or instructions for running the test suite.

Add a validation checkpoint after creating the route (e.g., 'Start the server and verify the route appears in the route list or responds correctly').

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The content is brief and doesn't over-explain concepts Claude already knows. However, the opening line 'Add a new API endpoint to the Fastify backend' slightly restates what the skill title/description already conveys, a minor redundancy.

4 / 5

Actionability

The guidance is entirely vague with no concrete code, commands, file naming conventions, schema examples, or specific Fastify patterns. Every step is abstract ('Create the route handler', 'Add the request and response schema', 'Test it') with no executable detail.

1 / 5

Workflow Clarity

A rough sequence of four steps is present, but steps are poorly defined with no specifics on how to perform them. There are no validation checkpoints, no error handling guidance, and 'Test it' is completely undefined.

2 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The content is short and doesn't need external files, but it also lacks any structure beyond a single heading and numbered list. For such a simple skill, the organization is adequate but not exemplary—it could benefit from inline examples or references to project conventions.

3 / 5

Total

10

/

20

Passed

Description

25%

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 extremely terse and vague, providing only a single generic action ('add an endpoint') with no specifics about the technology, framework, or process involved. It lacks a 'Use when...' clause entirely, making it difficult for Claude to know when to select this skill over others. The description would benefit significantly from concrete details and explicit trigger guidance.

Suggestions

Add a 'Use when...' clause with trigger terms like 'API route', 'REST endpoint', 'new route', 'add endpoint', 'backend handler', and mention specific frameworks if applicable (e.g., Express, FastAPI, Django).

Expand the 'what' with concrete actions such as 'Creates route handlers, defines request/response schemas, adds middleware, and registers endpoints in the router' to clarify the scope of the skill.

Include distinguishing details like the specific backend framework, language, or architectural pattern to reduce conflict risk with other backend-related skills.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

Names a domain (backend endpoint creation) but the action is minimal and generic — 'add an endpoint' is a single vague action with no detail about what kind of endpoint, what framework, or what steps are involved.

2 / 5

Completeness

Has a very vague 'what' (add an endpoint to the backend) but completely lacks any 'when' clause or trigger guidance. The absence of a 'Use when...' clause caps this at 3 per the rubric, and the weak 'what' brings it to 2.

2 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Contains 'endpoint' and 'backend' which are somewhat relevant keywords, but misses natural user phrases like 'API route', 'REST', 'handler', 'controller', 'route', or specific framework names users would mention.

2 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Very broad — 'backend' and 'endpoint' could overlap with many skills related to API development, server configuration, database setup, or any backend-related task. No framework or technology specificity to distinguish it.

2 / 5

Total

8

/

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.

Validation11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
tesslio/product-plugins
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.