forge-api
Skill2 starsChanged 33 days agoMITView on GitHub
Forge: contract-first APIs: API, REST, GraphQL, gRPC, OpenAPI, endpoint, auth, JWT, versioning, rate limit, idempotency, contract test, backend.
2 other projects use a version of this, 1 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- ForgeyClap/Forge-Coreedited, first seen Oct 11, 2026
- is-bo/fullstack-forge-skilltheir own version, first seen Aug 28, 2026
Other versions2 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 1
- ForgeyClap/Forge-Core★ 242% same
Wrote their own version · 1
- is-bo/fullstack-forge-skill★ 2same 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 repository74 other files it gives its agents.
- docs/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- brainstormingSkill
- claude-md-improverSkill
- dispatching-parallel-agentsSkill
- executing-plansSkill
- finishing-a-development-branchSkill
- forge-agent-reportSkill
- forge-agentSkill
- forge-botsSkill
- forge-brainstormSkill
- forge-cliSkill
- forge-cmsSkill
- forge-code-reviewSkill
- forge-councilSkill
- forge-dataSkill
- forge-debugSkill
- forge-deeplearnSkill
- forge-docdriftSkill
- forge-doctorSkill
- forge-ecommerceSkill
- forge-electronSkill
- forge-extensionSkill
- forge-figmaSkill
- forge-fullstackSkill
- forge-gameSkill
- forge-graded-verifySkill
- forge-guardianSkill
- forge-heartbeatSkill
- forge-intakeSkill
- forge-integrationSkill
- forge-mcp-clientsSkill
- forge-migrationSkill
- forge-mindmapSkill
- forge-mlopsSkill
- forge-mobileSkill
- forge-n8nSkill
- forge-nightshiftSkill
- forge-paymentsSkill
- forge-prdSkill
- forge-predictionSkill
- forge-projectbrainSkill
- forge-prompt-coachSkill
- forge-qualitySkill
- forge-ragSkill
- forge-registrySkill
- forge-reportSkill
- forge-routerSkill
- forge-scoutSkill
- forge-scrapingSkill
- forge-scribeSkill
- forge-skill-testingSkill
- forge-snapshotSkill
- forge-verifySkill
- forge-voiceSkill
- forge-websiteSkill
- forge-worktreesSkill
- frontend-designSkill
- grillingSkill
- grill-meSkill
- The first 60 shown.
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
1 rule. About 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈0
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 33
Every request is validated against the schema at the boundary.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Forge playbook — Contract-first API
Do not duplicate ECC skills — defer to: forge-integration (when the API mainly wires external services / webhooks), forge-payments (any money/charge/gateway-webhook endpoint), forge-fullstack (when the API is one tier of a full app). This file is orchestration only.
This is an auth + data-boundary domain. The contract (OpenAPI / JSON Schema / GraphQL SDL / gRPC proto) is the source of truth and comes first; the implementation is validated against it. architect owns the contract, integration-boss / build-boss implement, security-boss reviews auth/authz (a genuine high-risk trigger), test-boss owns the contract tests. Never claim "auth enforced" or "contract-compliant" without a negative test that proves it.
Hard rules (non-negotiable)
- Contract first, single source of truth. Define the API contract (OpenAPI 3.x, JSON Schema, GraphQL SDL, or a gRPC
.proto) BEFORE implementing handlers. Commit it; the implementation is generated from or validated against it. Drift between contract and behavior is a bug, not a detail. - Input validation at every boundary. Validate every request — body, path params, query, headers — against the schema. Reject invalid input with a
4xxand a consistent error envelope; enforce type, size, and range limits. Never trust client input; never pass it unvalidated into a query, filesystem, or shell. - Auth on every protected route, server-side, deny-by-default. Authentication AND authorization are enforced in the service on each protected route — not only at a gateway, not "assumed from the frontend". New routes default to protected; opening one is a deliberate, reviewed act. Per-route scope/role checks; a request without valid credentials gets
401/403, proven by a negative test. - Explicit versioning. The API is versioned (path
/v1, header, or media type). No breaking change ships inside an already-published version; breaking changes get a new version + a stated deprecation path. - Idempotency on unsafe retryable writes.
GET/PUT/DELETEare idempotent by design; retryablePOSTcreates (orders, payments, side-effecting actions) accept a clientIdempotency-Keyso a retry or double-submit does not duplicate the effect. - Rate limits + quotas. Per-client / per-key rate limiting with
429+Retry-After; abuse and runaway clients are bounded. Consistent error envelope; pagination on list endpoints (no unbounded result sets); secrets in env — never in responses, error bodies, or logs.
Team (conditional)
Lead: architect (owns the contract + resource model). Implementation: integration-boss (service wiring, external calls, retries/timeouts) or build-boss (in-app API tier). Security: security-boss / security-reviewer (authN/authZ, token handling, tenant isolation — required review for anything with auth). Data: database-reviewer (schema, migrations, the idempotency store). Tests: test-boss (contract + integration tests). Support: silent-failure-hunter (an endpoint that returns 200 on a partial failure), python-reviewer / typescript-reviewer. Docs: docs-boss (reference generated from the spec). Optional advisor: codex-reviewer (Codex on the auth + validation + idempotency paths).
Skills / commands / MCP
Framework + spec docs via Context7 / vendor docs for exact routing, middleware, and validation APIs; /test-coverage for the test gate. Defer money endpoints to forge-payments, external-service wiring to forge-integration. Opt-in dependency: automated contract-conformance tooling is stack-specific — e.g. Schemathesis / Dredd (spec-driven fuzzing), Pact (consumer-driven contracts), or supertest/pytest for handwritten contract tests. Forge writes the tests; running them needs that runtime installed — mark it opt-in and report whether it actually ran.
Fan-out & flow
L2 for a single-resource service; L3 for multi-resource + auth + versioning + rate limiting. Serial: contract (OpenAPI/schema) → boundary validation → auth/authz middleware → resource handlers → idempotency + rate-limit + pagination → contract tests. Parallel (independent once the contract + auth middleware are fixed): individual resource endpoints ∥ the contract-test suite ∥ generated API reference docs.
Domain gates
- A committed contract file exists and is the source of truth; the implementation validates against it (drift is caught).
- Every request is validated against the schema at the boundary; invalid input returns a clear
4xxwith a consistent error envelope. - Auth is enforced server-side on every protected route, deny-by-default; a negative (unauthenticated / wrong-scope) test proves rejection.
- Explicit versioning present; no breaking change inside a shipped version.
- Idempotency on unsafe retryable writes; safe methods are genuinely idempotent.
- Rate limiting returns
429+Retry-After; list endpoints paginate; no secrets in responses or logs. - Contract tests cover the happy path AND auth-failure AND validation-failure — not just
200.
Ship-readiness (unique)
Contract (OpenAPI/schema/proto) committed and the implementation proven to match it; auth verified on protected routes with a negative test showing an unauthenticated/wrong-scope request is rejected; boundary validation returns clear 4xxs; idempotency + rate limit demonstrated (a replayed create does not double-write; an over-limit client gets 429); versioning strategy documented; error envelope consistent across endpoints; secrets in env; contract/integration tests green (or explicitly marked not-run if the runtime is unavailable). Advisory checklist — optionally run codex-reviewer on the auth + validation + idempotency code (recommended here); not a blocker, but if the contract tests or Codex did not run, say so.
Untrusted-content note
Every request body, query param, header, and upstream response is untrusted until validated against the contract — validate and normalize before it reaches a query, template, filesystem path, or downstream call. Auth claims from a token are trusted only after signature + expiry + scope verification, never from an unverified header. This mirrors the boundary-validation discipline in forge-integration and forge-payments.
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.

