SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BC api-breaking-change-detector

Cross-references C# Web API controllers/DTOs against their TypeScript/JavaScript consumers (React, Angular, Vue, Svelte, Node.js, or hand-written/auto-generated HTTP clients like Fetch, Axios, NSwag) to catch contract drift in both directions: backend changes that break client applications (renamed/removed JSON keys, new required parameters, status code shifts) and frontend code sending fields the backend no longer reads. Works directly against source code, not exported OpenAPI spec files. Use when the user asks to check for breaking API changes, verify frontend/backend contract sync, or audit a DTO/controller change against its TypeScript/JS consumers before merging. Not for generating new API code from a spec (see openapi-to-application-code) or scaffolding new endpoints (see aspnet-minimal-api-openapi).

github/awesome-copilot Agent Skills author: github MIT 1 file body ≈ 1 460 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 5 d ago

Cross-references C Web API controllers/DTOs against their TypeScript/JavaScript consumers (React, Angular, Vue, Svelte, Node.js, or…

As a process C 62/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: inputs and preconditions, failures and branches, progress reporting

IntegrationSoftware developmenttype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: GitHub Copilot / VS Code Claude / Claude Code ChatGPT / Codex Gemini CLI Cursor Qwen Code Kimi Code CLI Z.ai (GLM) DeepSeek (Deep Code) Mistral Vibe LangChain (deepagents) OpenClaw Goose OpenCode
JSON
Technical rating
B
94/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
84
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
62/100
Has gaps
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Failures and branches w 10
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

    For the model run — optional
    • 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 · 0

    ✓ No critical or high findings

    Files scanned: 1. 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 62/100

    • 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
    • 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash, web) that frontmatter does not declare
    • 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
    • 85Steps. 40 steps, 1 vague phrases
    • 100When it triggers. States when to use and when not to
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1460 tokens
    • 100Running it twice. Mutating operations check current state

    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
    • +3Description length 817: 120–800 characters recommended
    • +4No input/output examples
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +4Description says when NOT to use the skill
    • +4Structure: 5 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 40 items
    • +3Output format is stated explicitly

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 84.