BC qa-api-testing
当需要测试 RESTful/GraphQL/gRPC/WebSocket 等 API 时使用此技能。覆盖接口的功能验证、参数组合、鉴权绕过、超时重试、幂等性、接口契约和向后兼容性。不要只测 HTTP 状态码——真正的接口 Bug 往往在数据结构不一致、字段类型不匹配、空值处理和并发调用上。输出接口测试矩阵、契约断言清单和工具选型建议。 触发场景：接口测试、API测试、接口自动化、RESTful测试、GraphQL测试、gRPC测试、契约测试、接口安全测试、需要测试API时。 Use when the user asks about: API testing for REST, GraphQL, gRPC, WebSocket, SOAP, and webhook endpoints — contract validation, auth bypass, idempotency, timeout and retry behavior, and backward compatibility.
当需要测试 RESTful/GraphQL/gRPC/WebSocket 等 API 时使用此技能。覆盖接口的功能验证、参数组合、鉴权绕过、超时重试、幂等性、接口契约和向后兼容性。不要只测 HTTP 状态码——真正的接口 Bug…
As a process C 59/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, failures and branches
What is at stake
Medium-severity findings: the skill is probably honest, but read what alarmed the scanner.
Below is the worst case for this category. The finding here is medium: the guard saw a sign, not a proof.
The skill asks for more than the task needs: broad tool access, credential environment variables, binaries. Every extra permission widens the damage from a mistake or a compromise.
Narrow allowed-tools and the variable list to the minimum; replace binaries with readable sources or scripts.
How to improve
- Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
- A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.
Guard findings · 1
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 1
-
medium Broad scope
meta-broad-allowed-toolsSKILL.md:1Broad tool permissions pre-approved: Bashallowed-tools: Read Grep Glob Bash WebFetch
Files scanned: 7. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
✓ No remarks against the Agent Skills spec
Process rating: all ten parameters 59/100
- 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 100Tools and files. Tools declared in frontmatter
- 100Steps. 6 steps
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 875 tokens
- 100Running it twice. No mutating operations
Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.
Quality signals
- +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 450: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 8 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 6 items
- +4Has examples (1 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (4 of 4)
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 89.