AgentStack
SKILL verified MIT Self-run

Api Design

skill-tranhieutt-software-development-department-api-design · by tranhieutt

Defines REST and GraphQL API contracts including endpoints, request/response schemas, auth flows, and versioning strategy. Use when designing a new API, reviewing an API spec, or when the user mentions API design, OpenAPI, or endpoint contracts.

No reviews yet
0 installs
18 views
0.0% view→install

Install

$ agentstack add skill-tranhieutt-software-development-department-api-design

✓ scanned · ✓ verified — works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.

Security review

✓ Passed

No issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →

  • Prompt-injection patterns
  • Secret / credential exfiltration
  • Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
  • Untrusted network calls
  • Known-malicious package signatures

What it can access

  • Network access Used
  • Filesystem access No
  • Shell / process execution No
  • Environment & secrets No
  • Dynamic code execution No

From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.

Are you the author of Api Design? Claim this listing to set pricing, connect Stripe payouts, and keep 70% of every sale.
Sign up to claim

About

When this skill is invoked:

  1. Read the target API spec or route files in full.

For API design in an existing domain, SHOULD also inspect docs/technical/API.md, related design/specs/*, related design/contracts/* if present, and recent relevant ledger entries via /trace-history. This is advisory unless the change is an ADR, coordination-rule change, high-risk retry, or protocol removal.

  1. Identify the API type (REST, GraphQL, WebSocket) and apply appropriate standards.
  1. Evaluate REST design quality (if REST):
  • [ ] Resources use nouns, not verbs (/users, not /getUsers)
  • [ ] Correct HTTP methods (GET=read, POST=create, PUT/PATCH=update, DELETE=remove)
  • [ ] Consistent plural resource naming (/users, /orders)
  • [ ] Nested resources have max 2-3 levels of depth
  • [ ] Query parameters used for filtering, sorting, pagination (not in path)
  1. Evaluate request/response schemas:
  • [ ] All inputs are validated and typed
  • [ ] Responses are consistent in structure (envelope format if used)
  • [ ] Pagination is consistent (cursor or page-based, not mixed)
  • [ ] Timestamps in ISO 8601 (UTC)
  • [ ] Money values in smallest currency unit (cents), not floats
  1. Evaluate authentication & authorization:
  • [ ] Every endpoint has explicit auth requirement documented
  • [ ] Authorization is checked server-side, not just on the client
  • [ ] Sensitive data not leaked in error messages
  1. Evaluate error responses:
  • [ ] Consistent error format (RFC 7807 Problem Details recommended)
  • [ ] HTTP status codes used correctly (400 for client errors, 500 for server)
  • [ ] Error messages are user-safe (no stack traces, SQL errors)
  1. Evaluate versioning & backward compatibility:
  • [ ] Breaking changes require a version bump
  • [ ] Deprecation policy documented
  • [ ] Clients can negotiate API version
  1. Output the review:
## API Design Review: [API/Endpoint Name]

### REST Design: [CLEAN / ISSUES FOUND]
[List specific issues with examples]

### Schema Quality: [CLEAN / ISSUES FOUND]
[List schema inconsistencies or problems]

### Auth & Security: [SECURE / ISSUES FOUND]
[List authentication and authorization issues]

### Error Handling: [CONSISTENT / ISSUES FOUND]
[List error response problems]

### Versioning: [HANDLED / UNADDRESSED]
[Notes on breaking change risk]

### Positive Observations
[What is well-designed]

### Required Changes
[Must-fix items before shipping]

### Suggestions
[Nice-to-have improvements]

### Verdict: [APPROVED / APPROVED WITH SUGGESTIONS / CHANGES REQUIRED]

Protocol

  • Question: Auto-starts from argument (path to API spec or route files); no clarification needed
  • Options: Skip — single review path
  • Decision: Skip — verdict is advisory
  • Draft: Full review report shown in conversation only
  • Approval: Skip — read-only; no files written

Output

Deliver exactly:

  • Endpoint compliance score (X/Y checks passing across naming, methods, validation, errors)
  • Security issues with severity — CRITICAL / HIGH / MEDIUM (or "None")
  • Required changes — must fix before shipping (or "None")
  • Verdict: APPROVED / APPROVED WITH SUGGESTIONS / CHANGES REQUIRED

Source & license

This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.

Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.

Reviews

No reviews yet — be the first.

Versions

  • v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.