api-endpoint-deprecation
Skill4 starsChanged 52 days agoMITView on GitHub
Use when planning, implementing, or reviewing API deprecation, replacement versions, sunset headers, migration windows, consumer verification, or endpoint removal.
In this repository37 other files it gives its agents.
- global-instructions/AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- api-contract-safetySkill
- aspnet-core-api-developmentSkill
- background-services-dotnetSkill
- bug-investigationSkill
- code-qualitySkill
- code-reviewSkill
- context-resetSkill
- dependency-managementSkill
- deployment-readiness-dotnetSkill
- diff-reviewSkill
- distributed-workflowsSkill
- dotnet-architectureSkill
- dotnet-implementationSkill
- dotnet-securitySkill
- ef-core-safetySkill
- exception-handlingSkill
- git-workflowSkill
- google-bigquery-dotnetSkill
- google-cloud-pubsub-dotnetSkill
- google-firestore-dotnetSkill
- http-client-integrationsSkill
- integration-testing-dotnetSkill
- observability-dotnetSkill
- performance-diagnostics-dotnetSkill
- poc-developmentSkill
- production-debuggingSkill
- production-hotfixSkill
- production-loggingSkill
- redis-dotnetSkill
- relational-database-dotnetSkill
- retry-resilienceSkill
- safe-terminalSkill
- shared-code-impactSkill
- targeted-validationSkill
- task-routerSkill
- unit-testingSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
4 rules. About 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈4
Distinctive · estimate
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
- Distinctive: line 8
Treat endpoint removal as a breaking change.
- Distinctive: line 15
When deprecating, identify the replacement and compatibility differences.
- Distinctive: line 19
search routes, clients, tests, docs, generated SDKs, gateway/configuration, and internal repository references.
- Distinctive: line 25
No code reference is not proof that no customer calls the endpoint.
≈ “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
Safe API endpoint deprecation
Treat endpoint removal as a breaking change. A replacement endpoint does not authorize deleting the old one. Use the repository's API governance and a lifecycle such as:
ACTIVE -> DEPRECATED -> CUSTOMER MIGRATION WINDOW -> USAGE VERIFICATION
-> REMOVAL APPROVED -> REMOVEDWhen deprecating, identify the replacement and compatibility differences. Apply supported API versioning, OpenAPI/developer-portal deprecation metadata, response headers where appropriate, migration documentation, routing/feature-flag strategy, customer/consumer communication, and a realistic sunset window.
Before proposed removal:
- search routes, clients, tests, docs, generated SDKs, gateway/configuration, and internal repository references;
- identify known internal and external consumers and owners;
- inspect usage telemetry, access logs, dashboards, and monitoring over the agreed window where available;
- confirm the replacement is deployed, documented, and functionally sufficient;
- define rollback/compatibility handling and obtain the required product/API-owner approval.
No code reference is not proof that no customer calls the endpoint. Do not remove the route, DTOs, handlers, tests, or documentation without explicit user direction to perform removal. A request to add or document a replacement alone is insufficient.
During removal, preserve unrelated versions/routes, update contract tests and generated artifacts through established workflows, and verify the retired route behavior intentionally. Record approval and evidence in the repository's normal change process rather than inventing a new governance system.
Record replacement readiness, observed consumer usage, accountable decision owner, agreed migration window and intended retired-route behavior in the existing change process.
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.

