CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

testland/pact-contract-testing

Authors and verifies Pact consumer-driven contract tests across the full Pact lifecycle - consumer tests producing pact files, publishing to the Pact Broker, provider verification, and `can-i-deploy` deployment gates. Use when introducing a new HTTP/JSON API contract between two services, diagnosing breaking changes, or wiring contract verification into CI.

75

Quality

94%

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

Overview
Quality
Evals
Security
Files

Quality

Content

92%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.

A high-quality, execution-ready skill body: complete code for both consumer and provider sides, a clearly sequenced lifecycle with an explicit deployment gate, and well-structured one-level-deep references. The only improvement area is trimming a few sentences that explain concepts Claude already knows.

Suggestions

Trim or compress known-concept explanations in the 'Publishing to the Pact Broker' and 'Overview' sections (e.g., 'The Broker is the central registry for pact files and verification results') to keep every token earning its place.

Add the missing `const path = require('path');` import (or drop `path.resolve`) to the `PactV3` consumer example so it is truly copy-paste executable.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is efficient and assumes competence, with high-value non-obvious details (canonical branch+SHA tagging, `consumerVersionSelectors` semantics, the record-deployment pitfall), but a few sentences restate common knowledge ('The Broker is the central registry for pact files and verification results') and could be trimmed.

4 / 5

Actionability

Fully executable throughout: an install command, a complete `PactV3` consumer test, publish/`can-i-deploy`/`record-deployment` commands with a flag table and exit codes, `Verifier` configuration with state handlers, and offloaded CI steps in a real reference file — copy-paste ready with only trivial omissions.

5 / 5

Workflow Clarity

The five-step lifecycle is enumerated 1–5 and the sections follow that order; validation is explicit via `can-i-deploy` exit codes, and error-recovery guidance is included ('State setup that fails causes the matching interaction to fail', skipping record-deployment as the top cause of spurious 'no' verdicts).

5 / 5

Progressive Disclosure

The single bundle reference (`references/ci-pipelines.md`) exists, is clearly signaled from the CI section, and is exactly one level deep; the SKILL.md body is a well-sectioned overview that appropriately splits CI detail out.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

20

Passed

Description

92%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: it enumerates concrete capabilities across the full Pact lifecycle and pairs them with an explicit, multi-scenario 'Use when' trigger clause. Its only weakness is a handful of missing natural synonyms that would push trigger coverage to the top anchor.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description lists four concrete, comprehensive capabilities: 'consumer tests producing pact files, publishing to the Pact Broker, provider verification, and `can-i-deploy` deployment gates' — every major lifecycle action is named, matching the top anchor rather than the 'minor gaps' level below.

5 / 5

Completeness

It explicitly answers both questions: the 'what' is four named capabilities, and the 'when' is a concrete 'Use when introducing a new HTTP/JSON API contract between two services, diagnosing breaking changes, or wiring contract verification into CI' clause with specific trigger scenarios.

5 / 5

Trigger Term Quality

Strong natural keyword coverage ('Pact', 'contract tests', 'pact files', 'Pact Broker', 'provider verification', 'can-i-deploy', 'breaking changes', 'CI'), but a few common user phrasings like 'consumer/provider pair', 'integration test', or 'mock server' are absent, placing it just below the comprehensive-synonym anchor.

4 / 5

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The Pact tool is named repeatedly with its distinctive lifecycle vocabulary (Broker, can-i-deploy, provider verification), giving it a clear niche with minimal overlap risk against generic testing or schema-diff skills.

5 / 5

Total

19

/

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.

Reviewed

Table of Contents