AF drift-testing
Verifies API implementations against OpenAPI specifications using the Drift CLI, catching spec drift and supporting Bi-Directional Contract Testing (BDCT). Use when the user mentions Drift, API contract testing, provider contract testing, provider verification, spec drift, API conformance testing, OpenAPI verification, BDCT, drift expressions, drift datasets, drift lifecycle hooks, or Lua scripting in a testing context. Use when the user asks to write, run, or debug Drift test cases. Use when the user wants to test their API against an OpenAPI spec, generate tests from an OpenAPI spec, or check whether their API has drifted from its spec. Use when the user wants full endpoint coverage, wants all tests to pass, or asks to "keep running until everything passes".
As a process F 50/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: scripts/run_loop.ps1, scripts/start_mock.ps1
How to improve
- The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
- Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
- A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.
Guard findings · 1
✓ No critical or high findings
Medium and low: 1
-
low Secrets in code
secret-high-entropy-tokenreferences/mock-server.md:81High-entropy token-like string (may be an id, hash or a credential) (test fixture / example file; quoted — discussed, not commanded)"4a72…6aX" is not a "uuid"
fixturequoted
Files scanned: 12. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: scripts/run_loop.ps1 - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: scripts/start_mock.ps1
Process rating: all ten parameters 50/100
- 0Tools and files. 2 referenced file(s) missing: scripts/run_loop.ps1, scripts/start_mock.ps1
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 40Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
- 85Steps. 10 steps, 1 vague phrases
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 3649 tokens
- 100Running it twice. Mutating operations check current state
Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.
Quality signals
- +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- -2localhost URLs: will not work for another user
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 770: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 15 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 10 items
- +4Has examples (19 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (6 of 6)
- +3All 4 scripts are documented
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 80.