capture-api-response-test-fixture
Capture API response test fixture.
62
43%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
99%
2.02xAverage score across 3 eval scenarios
Passed
No known issues
Optimize this skill with Tessl
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./skills/capture-api-response-test-fixture/SKILL.mdQuality
Discovery
22%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 too terse and lacks both concrete action details and explicit trigger guidance. While it hints at a specific niche (API test fixtures), it fails to explain what operations are performed or when the skill should be selected. It would be easily overlooked or mismatched among a larger set of skills.
Suggestions
Expand the 'what' by listing specific actions, e.g., 'Records API responses and saves them as JSON test fixtures for use in unit and integration tests.'
Add an explicit 'Use when...' clause with natural trigger terms, e.g., 'Use when the user asks to capture, record, or save API responses as test fixtures, mocks, or stubs.'
Include common keyword variations users might say: 'mock data', 'HTTP response snapshot', 'fixture file', 'stub API', '.json fixture'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description names a vague action ('capture') in a specific domain ('API response test fixture') but does not list concrete actions or elaborate on what capturing entails—no mention of saving, formatting, mocking, or any specific operations. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The description only weakly addresses 'what' (capture API response test fixture) and completely lacks a 'when should Claude use it' clause. Per the rubric, a missing 'Use when...' clause caps completeness at 2, and the 'what' is also too vague to merit even a 2. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Contains some relevant keywords like 'API response', 'test fixture' that users might say, but misses common variations such as 'mock', 'stub', 'snapshot', 'record HTTP response', or file format terms. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The phrase 'API response test fixture' is somewhat specific and narrows the domain, but it could overlap with skills related to API testing, mocking, or general test setup without clearer boundaries. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 6 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
64%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a solid, actionable skill with concrete code examples for both generateText and streamText fixture capture workflows. Its main weaknesses are slightly implicit workflow steps (no explicit validation of captured fixtures) and minor verbosity in the introductory paragraph. Overall it provides useful, specific guidance that Claude can follow.
Suggestions
Add explicit numbered steps for each workflow (e.g., 1. Run script, 2. Verify output JSON, 3. Copy to fixtures folder, 4. Rename following convention)
Add a validation step such as verifying the fixture file is valid JSON and checking its size before committing
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Mostly efficient but has some unnecessary filler like 'we aim at storing test fixtures with the true responses from the providers' and the parenthetical about large responses. Could be tightened slightly. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides fully executable TypeScript code examples for both generateText and streamText scenarios, with specific commands (pnpm tsx), specific file paths, and concrete helper functions to use. | 3 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The two workflows (generateText and streamText) are clearly separated with steps, but the steps are somewhat implicit rather than explicitly numbered. The streamText workflow mentions running a command and copying output but lacks explicit validation checkpoints (e.g., verifying the fixture is valid JSON, checking file size). | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | References to fixture directories and test files are provided for context, but the skill inlines all content rather than linking to supplementary docs. For its size this is acceptable, but the references to naming conventions and test helpers could be more clearly signaled with direct links. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 9 / 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 |
|---|---|---|
metadata_version | 'metadata.version' is missing | Warning |
metadata_field | 'metadata' should map string keys to string values | Warning |
Total | 9 / 11 Passed | |
- 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.