Appropriate use
Use for new or changed endpoints, service integrations, backend regressions, API releases, or contract verification.
Plans and executes API validation across contracts, authentication, authorisation, data integrity, errors, pagination, rate limits, idempotency, concurrency, and compatibility.
This page defines the behaviour, controls, evidence, and outputs required from the skill. It does not claim that a language model can enforce security or correctness by wording alone.
Use for new or changed endpoints, service integrations, backend regressions, API releases, or contract verification.
Do not use against production without explicit authorisation, as an unrestricted load test, or with secrets and real customer data in reports.
Each phase has explicit inputs and outputs. Approval gates are hard stops bound to exact versions and hashes.
Resolve service, environment, deployment manifest, OpenAPI or contract revision, authentication method, consumer versions, data stores, and rate-limit policy.
Map methods, paths, schemas, required fields, defaults, validation, status codes, error shapes, headers, pagination, versioning, and deprecation.
Create positive, negative, boundary, malformed, unauthorised, forbidden, missing, duplicate, idempotent, concurrent, and migration-sensitive cases.
Define isolated resources, idempotency keys, concurrency limits, rate-limit budget, external effects, cleanup, and prohibited production-like operations.
Run requests with exact method, URL, headers, body, timing, correlation ID, response, and resulting state recorded. Filter secrets before storage.
Test retries, timeouts, partial failure, pagination continuity, idempotency, concurrent updates, older consumers, schema evolution, and dependency failure where safe.
Classify contract mismatch, behaviour defect, authorisation defect, data-integrity issue, performance concern, environment failure, or documentation gap.
Publish redacted findings, contract coverage, generated test proposals, cleanup results, and unresolved compatibility risk.
An approval cannot be reused after its environment, source, action plan, or approved document changes.
| Gate | Decision | Required binding |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | Gate 1 · approve target | Approval stores approver, role, timestamp, context hash, approved document hash, expiry, and invalidation state. |
| 2 | Gate 2 · approve execution | Approval stores approver, role, timestamp, context hash, approved document hash, expiry, and invalidation state. |
| 3 | Gate 3 · confirm findings | Approval stores approver, role, timestamp, context hash, approved document hash, expiry, and invalidation state. |
| 4 | Gate 4 · publish | Approval stores approver, role, timestamp, context hash, approved document hash, expiry, and invalidation state. |
Attempt outcomes remain separate from these workflow results. Errors, cancellations, and invalid context are never silently converted into a pass.
The endpoint satisfies the approved contract and behaviour for the tested case.
Request or response shape, status, header, or documented compatibility is wrong.
The protocol is valid but resulting application state or rule is incorrect.
Authentication, authorisation, or sensitive-data handling is incorrect.
Retry, timeout, idempotency, concurrency, or dependency behaviour is unsafe.
The target, data, contract, or safe execution path is unavailable.
Evidence has provenance, capture context, privacy classification, retention, and integrity metadata. A convenient artifact is not automatically sufficient proof.
| Claim | Primary evidence | Required validation |
|---|---|---|
| Request | Redacted request record | Method, path, query, safe headers, body hash, and correlation ID are recorded. |
| Response | Redacted response record | Status, safe headers, schema, body hash, and timing are captured. |
| Contract | Versioned schema reference | The expected rule applies to the tested consumer and version. |
| State | Approved read-back or event evidence | The API result matches persisted or emitted behaviour. |
| Concurrency | Ordered request and state timeline | Conflicts, lost updates, and idempotency are visible. |
| Rate limit | Bounded request sequence | Limit, reset behaviour, and client guidance are checked without harmful load. |
These controls belong in the runtime, connector permissions, sandbox, renderer, storage layer, and review process.
Authorization, cookies, tokens, and sensitive payload fields are removed before evidence storage.
The runtime enforces request rate and concurrency limits.
Production hosts require explicit, scoped, read-only or otherwise approved access.
Generated expectations cannot override the approved API contract.
Created resources are tracked by returned IDs and cleaned safely.
Auth, data exposure, and cross-tenant findings use restricted channels.
The first applicable high-severity outcome takes precedence. A manual override is recorded separately and never rewrites the calculated result.
Service identity, contract, or environment cannot be trusted.
A release-blocking security, integrity, contract, or behaviour failure exists.
Required API coverage cannot be completed safely.
Required cases pass with accepted optional compatibility or resilience gaps.
All required API cases pass for the verified contract and deployment.
The workflow documents what it cannot prove and what further evidence would change confidence.
Human summaries are generated from validated structured records. They are not maintained as separate, drifting sources of truth.
api-context.jsonVersioned output produced by the workflow.
contract-map.yamlVersioned output produced by the workflow.
case-catalog.yamlVersioned output produced by the workflow.
traffic-plan.mdVersioned output produced by the workflow.
attempt-ledger.jsonlVersioned output produced by the workflow.
redacted-http/Versioned output produced by the workflow.
state-evidence/Versioned output produced by the workflow.
findings/Versioned output produced by the workflow.
cleanup-report.mdVersioned output produced by the workflow.
api-report.htmlVersioned output produced by the workflow.
artifacts/qa/api-qa/<run-id>/ ├── api-context.json ├── contract-map.yaml ├── case-catalog.yaml ├── traffic-plan.md ├── attempt-ledger.jsonl ├── redacted-http/ ├── state-evidence/ ├── findings/ ├── cleanup-report.md └── api-report.html
Test the new playlist API for validation, Member permissions, pagination, idempotent create requests, and two concurrent updates.
API result: REJECT Release-blocking finding: Two concurrent updates with the same version both return 200, and the earlier write silently overwrites the later one. Other results: - Validation: PASS - Member read permission: PASS - Member update permission: PASS - Pagination continuity: PASS - Idempotent create: PASS Classification: Data-integrity and concurrency failure.
The written skill is only one layer. The repository, runtime, connectors, evidence storage, and publication path must implement these requirements.
Plans and executes API validation across contracts, authentication, authorisation, data integrity, errors, pagination, rate limits, idempotency, concurrency, and compatibility.