SKILLEMALL.ai

AC contract-testing

Implement consumer-driven contract testing with Pact-JS (v16). Covers consumer test writing, broker-driven provider verification, Pact Broker setup, can-i-deploy as a deployment gate, webhook-triggered verification, pending pacts, and schema-first vs consumer-first approaches (OpenAPI/Ajv, Schemathesis). Use when: "contract test," "Pact," "consumer-driven," "API contract," "provider verification," "can-i-deploy." Not for: stubbing or mocking a dependency to isolate a test — use service-virtualization; general REST/GraphQL endpoint assertions against your own API — use api-testing. Related: api-testing, service-virtualization, ci-cd-integration, test-environments.

petrkindlmann/qa-skills Agent Skills author: petrkindlmann MIT 4 files body ≈ 3 919 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com analyzed 2 d ago

Implement consumer-driven contract testing with Pact-JS (v16).

As a process C 58/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, progress reporting

IntegrationDockerPostgreSQLInfrastructuretype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
JSON
Technical rating
A
99/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
98
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
58/100
Has gaps
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Progress reporting w 2
0
Result and completion w 14
40
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: 4. 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 58/100

    • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 40Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
    • 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
    • 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
    • 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash, node) that frontmatter does not declare
    • 85Steps. 31 steps, 1 vague phrases
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 3919 tokens
    • 100Running it twice. Mutating operations check current state
    • low 12 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
    • low The response is described with custom markup (6 tags): a typed call is more reliable

    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

    • +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +5Description quotes 5 example trigger phrases
    • +4Description says when NOT to use the skill
    • +3Description length 671: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 19 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 31 items
    • +4Has examples (1 code blocks)
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (3 of 3)
    • +1License stated

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 98.