api-design-reviewer
Skill0 starsChanged 7 months agoMITView on GitHub
API Design Reviewer
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
18 rules. 18 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
18
Common
Most of the 5 edited versions we read keep these.
0
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Common: line 58
POST: Create new resources (not idempotent)
- Common: line 61
DELETE: Remove resources (idempotent)
- Common: line 103
Cons: Not RESTful, can be ignored
- Common: line 247
GET: Always safe and idempotent
- Common: line 248
PUT: Should be idempotent (replace entire resource)
- Common: line 249
DELETE: Should be idempotent (same result)
- Common: line 280
Path Definitions: All endpoints with methods
- Common: line 287
Use consistent naming conventions
- Common: line 303
Use appropriate HTTP methods
- Common: line 307
Use ETags for conditional requests
- Common: line 312
Use async processing for heavy operations
- Common: line 327
Use strong authentication mechanisms
- Common: line 401
Monitoring: Add observability for API usage and performance
- Common: line 406
Verb-based URLs: Use nouns for resources, not actions
- Common: line 408
Over-nesting: Avoid deeply nested resource hierarchies
- Common: line 409
Ignoring HTTP Status Codes: Use appropriate status codes for different scenarios
- Common: line 411
Missing Pagination: Always paginate list endpoints
- Common: line 415
Inadequate Testing: Test all aspects including error cases and edge conditions
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 5 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
API Design Reviewer
Tier: POWERFUL
Category: Engineering / Architecture
Maintainer: Claude Skills Team
Overview
The API Design Reviewer skill provides comprehensive analysis and review of API designs, focusing on REST conventions, best practices, and industry standards. This skill helps engineering teams build consistent, maintainable, and well-designed APIs through automated linting, breaking change detection, and design scorecards.
Core Capabilities
1. API Linting and Convention Analysis
- Resource Naming Conventions: Enforces kebab-case for resources, camelCase for fields
- HTTP Method Usage: Validates proper use of GET, POST, PUT, PATCH, DELETE
- URL Structure: Analyzes endpoint patterns for consistency and RESTful design
- Status Code Compliance: Ensures appropriate HTTP status codes are used
- Error Response Formats: Validates consistent error response structures
- Documentation Coverage: Checks for missing descriptions and documentation gaps
2. Breaking Change Detection
- Endpoint Removal: Detects removed or deprecated endpoints
- Response Shape Changes: Identifies modifications to response structures
- Field Removal: Tracks removed or renamed fields in API responses
- Type Changes: Catches field type modifications that could break clients
- Required Field Additions: Flags new required fields that could break existing integrations
- Status Code Changes: Detects changes to expected status codes
3. API Design Scoring and Assessment
- Consistency Analysis (30%): Evaluates naming conventions, response patterns, and structural consistency
- Documentation Quality (20%): Assesses completeness and clarity of API documentation
- Security Implementation (20%): Reviews authentication, authorization, and security headers
- Usability Design (15%): Analyzes ease of use, discoverability, and developer experience
- Performance Patterns (15%): Evaluates caching, pagination, and efficiency patterns
REST Design Principles
Resource Naming Conventions
✅ Good Examples:
- /api/v1/users
- /api/v1/user-profiles
- /api/v1/orders/123/line-items
❌ Bad Examples:
- /api/v1/getUsers
- /api/v1/user_profiles
- /api/v1/orders/123/lineItemsHTTP Method Usage
- GET: Retrieve resources (safe, idempotent)
- POST: Create new resources (not idempotent)
- PUT: Replace entire resources (idempotent)
- PATCH: Partial resource updates (not necessarily idempotent)
- DELETE: Remove resources (idempotent)
URL Structure Best Practices
Collection Resources: /api/v1/users
Individual Resources: /api/v1/users/123
Nested Resources: /api/v1/users/123/orders
Actions: /api/v1/users/123/activate (POST)
Filtering: /api/v1/users?status=active&role=adminVersioning Strategies
1. URL Versioning (Recommended)
/api/v1/users
/api/v2/usersPros: Clear, explicit, easy to route
Cons: URL proliferation, caching complexity
2. Header Versioning
GET /api/users
Accept: application/vnd.api+json;version=1Pros: Clean URLs, content negotiation
Cons: Less visible, harder to test manually
3. Media Type Versioning
GET /api/users
Accept: application/vnd.myapi.v1+jsonPros: RESTful, supports multiple representations
Cons: Complex, harder to implement
4. Query Parameter Versioning
/api/users?version=1Pros: Simple to implement
Cons: Not RESTful, can be ignored
Pagination Patterns
Offset-Based Pagination
{
"data": [...],
"pagination": {
"offset": 20,
"limit": 10,
"total": 150,
"hasMore": true
}
}Cursor-Based Pagination
{
"data": [...],
"pagination": {
"nextCursor": "eyJpZCI6MTIzfQ==",
"hasMore": true
}
}Page-Based Pagination
{
"data": [...],
"pagination": {
"page": 3,
"pageSize": 10,
"totalPages": 15,
"totalItems": 150
}
}Error Response Formats
Standard Error Structure
{
"error": {
"code": "VALIDATION_ERROR",
"message": "The request contains invalid parameters",
"details": [
{
"field": "email",
"code": "INVALID_FORMAT",
"message": "Email address is not valid"
}
],
"requestId": "req-123456",
"timestamp": "2024-02-16T13:00:00Z"
}
}HTTP Status Code Usage
- 400 Bad Request: Invalid request syntax or parameters
- 401 Unauthorized: Authentication required
- 403 Forbidden: Access denied (authenticated but not authorized)
- 404 Not Found: Resource not found
- 409 Conflict: Resource conflict (duplicate, version mismatch)
- 422 Unprocessable Entity: Valid syntax but semantic errors
- 429 Too Many Requests: Rate limit exceeded
- 500 Internal Server Error: Unexpected server error
Authentication and Authorization Patterns
Bearer Token Authentication
Authorization: Bearer <token>API Key Authentication
X-API-Key: <api-key>
Authorization: Api-Key <api-key>OAuth 2.0 Flow
Authorization: Bearer <oauth-access-token>Role-Based Access Control (RBAC)
{
"user": {
"id": "123",
"roles": ["admin", "editor"],
"permissions": ["read:users", "write:orders"]
}
}Rate Limiting Implementation
Headers
X-RateLimit-Limit: 1000
X-RateLimit-Remaining: 999
X-RateLimit-Reset: 1640995200Response on Limit Exceeded
{
"error": {
"code": "RATE_LIMIT_EXCEEDED",
"message": "Too many requests",
"retryAfter": 3600
}
}HATEOAS (Hypermedia as the Engine of Application State)
Example Implementation
{
"id": "123",
"name": "John Doe",
"email": "john@example.com",
"_links": {
"self": { "href": "/api/v1/users/123" },
"orders": { "href": "/api/v1/users/123/orders" },
"profile": { "href": "/api/v1/users/123/profile" },
"deactivate": {
"href": "/api/v1/users/123/deactivate",
"method": "POST"
}
}
}Idempotency
Idempotent Methods
- GET: Always safe and idempotent
- PUT: Should be idempotent (replace entire resource)
- DELETE: Should be idempotent (same result)
- PATCH: May or may not be idempotent
Idempotency Keys
POST /api/v1/payments
Idempotency-Key: 123e4567-e89b-12d3-a456-426614174000Backward Compatibility Guidelines
Safe Changes (Non-Breaking)
- Adding optional fields to requests
- Adding fields to responses
- Adding new endpoints
- Making required fields optional
- Adding new enum values (with graceful handling)
Breaking Changes (Require Version Bump)
- Removing fields from responses
- Making optional fields required
- Changing field types
- Removing endpoints
- Changing URL structures
- Modifying error response formats
OpenAPI/Swagger Validation
Required Components
- API Information: Title, description, version
- Server Information: Base URLs and descriptions
- Path Definitions: All endpoints with methods
- Parameter Definitions: Query, path, header parameters
- Request/Response Schemas: Complete data models
- Security Definitions: Authentication schemes
- Error Responses: Standard error formats
Best Practices
- Use consistent naming conventions
- Provide detailed descriptions for all components
- Include examples for complex objects
- Define reusable components and schemas
- Validate against OpenAPI specification
Performance Considerations
Caching Strategies
Cache-Control: public, max-age=3600
ETag: "123456789"
Last-Modified: Wed, 21 Oct 2015 07:28:00 GMTEfficient Data Transfer
- Use appropriate HTTP methods
- Implement field selection (
?fields=id,name,email) - Support compression (gzip)
- Implement efficient pagination
- Use ETags for conditional requests
Resource Optimization
- Avoid N+1 queries
- Implement batch operations
- Use async processing for heavy operations
- Support partial updates (PATCH)
Security Best Practices
Input Validation
- Validate all input parameters
- Sanitize user data
- Use parameterized queries
- Implement request size limits
Authentication Security
- Use HTTPS everywhere
- Implement secure token storage
- Support token expiration and refresh
- Use strong authentication mechanisms
Authorization Controls
- Implement principle of least privilege
- Use resource-based permissions
- Support fine-grained access control
- Audit access patterns
Tools and Scripts
api_linter.py
Analyzes API specifications for compliance with REST conventions and best practices.
Features:
- OpenAPI/Swagger spec validation
- Naming convention checks
- HTTP method usage validation
- Error format consistency
- Documentation completeness analysis
breaking_change_detector.py
Compares API specification versions to identify breaking changes.
Features:
- Endpoint comparison
- Schema change detection
- Field removal/modification tracking
- Migration guide generation
- Impact severity assessment
api_scorecard.py
Provides comprehensive scoring of API design quality.
Features:
- Multi-dimensional scoring
- Detailed improvement recommendations
- Letter grade assessment (A-F)
- Benchmark comparisons
- Progress tracking
Integration Examples
CI/CD Integration
- name: "api-linting"
run: python scripts/api_linter.py openapi.json
- name: "breaking-change-detection"
run: python scripts/breaking_change_detector.py openapi-v1.json openapi-v2.json
- name: "api-scorecard"
run: python scripts/api_scorecard.py openapi.jsonPre-commit Hooks
#!/bin/bash
python engineering/api-design-reviewer/scripts/api_linter.py api/openapi.json
if [ $? -ne 0 ]; then
echo "API linting failed. Please fix the issues before committing."
exit 1
fiBest Practices Summary
- Consistency First: Maintain consistent naming, response formats, and patterns
- Documentation: Provide comprehensive, up-to-date API documentation
- Versioning: Plan for evolution with clear versioning strategies
- Error Handling: Implement consistent, informative error responses
- Security: Build security into every layer of the API
- Performance: Design for scale and efficiency from the start
- Backward Compatibility: Minimize breaking changes and provide migration paths
- Testing: Implement comprehensive testing including contract testing
- Monitoring: Add observability for API usage and performance
- Developer Experience: Prioritize ease of use and clear documentation
Common Anti-Patterns to Avoid
- Verb-based URLs: Use nouns for resources, not actions
- Inconsistent Response Formats: Maintain standard response structures
- Over-nesting: Avoid deeply nested resource hierarchies
- Ignoring HTTP Status Codes: Use appropriate status codes for different scenarios
- Poor Error Messages: Provide actionable, specific error information
- Missing Pagination: Always paginate list endpoints
- No Versioning Strategy: Plan for API evolution from day one
- Exposing Internal Structure: Design APIs for external consumption, not internal convenience
- Missing Rate Limiting: Protect your API from abuse and overload
- Inadequate Testing: Test all aspects including error cases and edge conditions
Conclusion
The API Design Reviewer skill provides a comprehensive framework for building, reviewing, and maintaining high-quality REST APIs. By following these guidelines and using the provided tools, development teams can create APIs that are consistent, well-documented, secure, and maintainable.
Regular use of the linting, breaking change detection, and scoring tools ensures continuous improvement and helps maintain API quality throughout the development lifecycle.
Other versions6 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 1
- csiddhant796-blip/claude-skills-collection★ 2100% same
Edited · 3
- Hassaan146/claude-skills★ 1887% same
- Hussain-Elfalah/Agentic-Skills★ 296% same
- mahiunfiltered/claude-code-skills★ 187% same
Wrote their own version · 2
- ATOM00blue/agent-skills-pro★ 0same name
- sharmasundip/claudeskills★ 0same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository39 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- skills/agenthub/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- skills/autoresearch-agent/CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- agent-designerSkill
- agenthubSkill
- agent-workflow-designerSkill
- api-test-suite-builderSkill
- autoresearch-agentSkill
- browser-automationSkill
- changelog-generatorSkill
- ci-cd-pipeline-builderSkill
- codebase-onboardingSkill
- database-designerSkill
- database-schema-designerSkill
- dependency-auditorSkill
- docker-developmentSkill
- env-secrets-managerSkill
- everything-claude-code-conventionsSkill
- focused-fixSkill
- git-worktree-managerSkill
- helm-chart-builderSkill
- interview-system-designerSkill
- mcp-server-builderSkill
- migration-architectSkill
- monorepo-navigatorSkill
- observability-designerSkill
- performance-profilerSkill
- pr-review-expertSkill
- rag-architectSkill
- release-managerSkill
- runbook-generatorSkill
- secrets-vault-managerSkill
- engineering-advanced-skillsSkill
- skill-security-auditorSkill
- skill-testerSkill
- spec-driven-workflowSkill
- sql-database-assistantSkill
- tech-debt-trackerSkill
- terraform-patternsSkill
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

