Checks layer leakage in method signatures, missing DTOs, entity leakage to API, inconsistent error contracts. Use when auditing API contracts.
Scanned 9/2/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add majiayu000/claude-skill-registry --skill ln-643-api-contract-auditor-levnikolaevich-claude-code-skills-3 --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Ln 643 Api Contract Auditor Levnikolaevich Claude Code Skills 3?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/majiayu000-ln-643-api-contract-auditor-levnikolaevich-claude)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: ln-643-api-contract-auditor
description: "Checks layer leakage in method signatures, missing DTOs, entity leakage to API, inconsistent error contracts. Use when auditing API contracts."
allowed-tools: Read, Grep, Glob, Bash, mcp__hex-graph__find_references, mcp__hex-graph__find_symbols, mcp__hex-line__read_file, mcp__hex-line__grep_search, mcp__hex-line__outline
license: MIT
---
> **Paths:** File paths (`references/`, `../ln-*`) are relative to this skill directory.
# API Contract Auditor (L3 Worker)
**Type:** L3 Worker
Specialized worker auditing API contracts, method signatures at service boundaries, and DTO usage patterns.
## Purpose & Scope
- Audit **API contracts** at architecture level (service boundaries, layer separation)
- Check layer leakage, DTO patterns, error contract consistency
- Return structured analysis with 4 scores (compliance, completeness, quality, implementation)
**Out of Scope:**
- Code duplication (same DTO shape repeated, same mapping logic, same validation)
- Report only ARCHITECTURE BOUNDARY findings (wrong layer, missing contract)
## Inputs
```
- pattern: "API Contracts" # Pattern name
- locations: string[] # Service/API directories
- adr_reference: string # Path to related ADR
- bestPractices: object # Best practices from MCP Ref/Context7
- output_dir: string # e.g., ".hex-skills/runtime-artifacts/runs/{run_id}/audit-report"
# Domain-aware (optional)
- domain_mode: "global" | "domain-aware" # Default: "global"
- current_domain: string # e.g., "users", "billing" (only if domain-aware)
- scan_path: string # e.g., "src/users/" (only if domain-aware)
```
## Workflow
### Phase 0: Load References
Load `references/detection_patterns.md` -- language-specific Grep patterns for all 5 rules.
Detection policy: use two-layer detection (candidate scan, then context verification); load `references/two_layer_detection.md` only when the verification method is ambiguous.
Tool policy: follow host AGENTS.md MCP preferences; load `references/mcp_tool_preferences.md` and `references/mcp_integration_patterns.md` only when host policy is absent or MCP behavior is unclear.
Use `hex-graph` first when symbol or reference analysis materially improves contract findings. Use `hex-line` first for local code reads when available. If MCP is unavailable, unsupported, or not indexed, continue with built-in `Read/Grep/Glob/Bash` and state the fallback in the report.
### Phase 1: Discover Service Boundaries
```
scan_root = scan_path IF domain_mode == "domain-aware" ELSE codebase_root
1. Find API layer: Glob("**/api/**/*.py", "**/routes/**/*.ts", "**/controllers/**/*.ts", root=scan_root)
2. Find service layer: Glob("**/services/**/*.py", "**/services/**/*.ts", root=scan_root)
3. Find domain layer: Glob("**/domain/**/*.py", "**/models/**/*.py", root=scan_root)
4. Map: which services are called by which API endpoints
```
### Phase 2: Analyze Contracts (5 Rules)
**MANDATORY READ:** Load `references/detection_patterns.md` for language-specific Grep patterns per rule.
| # | Rule | Severity | What to Check |
|---|------|----------|---------------|
| 1 | Layer Leakage | HIGH/MEDIUM | Service/domain accepts HTTP types (Request, parsed_body, headers) |
| 2 | Missing DTO | MEDIUM/LOW | 4+ params repeated in 2+ methods without grouping DTO |
| 3 | Entity Leakage | HIGH/MEDIUM | ORM entity returned from API without response DTO. Downgrade when: internal API with no external consumers -> LOW |
| 4 | Error Contracts | MEDIUM/LOW | Mixed error patterns (raise + return None) in same service |
| 5 | Redundant Overloads | LOW/MEDIUM | Method pairs with `_with_`/`_and_` suffix differing by 1-2 params |
| 6 | Architectural Honesty | HIGH/MEDIUM | Read-named function (get_/find_/check_/validate_/is_/has_) body contains write side-effects. Exclusions per `references/ai_ready_architecture.md` |
**Scope boundary:** SKIP duplication findings. REPORT only ARCHITECTURE BOUNDARY findings.
### Phase 3: Calculate 4 Scores
**Compliance Score (0-100):**
| Criterion | Points |
|-----------|--------|
| No layer leakage (HTTP types in service) | +35 |
| Consistent error handling pattern | +25 |
| Follows project naming conventions | +10 |
| No hidden side-effects in read-named functions | +10 |
| No entity leakage to API | +20 |
**Completeness Score (0-100):**
| Criterion | Points |
|-----------|--------|
| All service methods have typed params | +30 |
| All service methods have typed returns | +30 |
| DTOs defined for complex data | +20 |
| Error types documented/typed | +20 |
**Quality Score (0-100):**
| Criterion | Points |
|-----------|--------|
| No boolean flag params in service methods | +15 |
| No opaque return types hiding write actions | +10 |
| No methods with >5 params without DTO | +25 |
| Consistent naming across module | +25 |
| No redundant overloads | +25 |
**Implementation Score (0-100):**
| Criterion | Points |
|-----------|--------|
| DTOs/schemas exist and are used | +30 |
| Type annotations present | +25 |
| Validation at boundaries (Pydantic, Zod) | +25 |
| API response DTOs separate from domain | +20 |
### Phase 3.5: Calculate Score
**MANDATORY READ:** Load `references/audit_worker_core_contract.md` and `references/audit_scoring.md`.
**Primary score** uses penalty formula (same as all workers):
```
penalty = (critical x 2.0) + (high x 1.0) + (medium x 0.5) + (low x 0.2)
score = max(0, 10 - penalty)
```
**Diagnostic sub-scores** (0-100 each) are calculated separately and reported in AUDIT-META for diagnostic purposes only.
### Phase 4: Write Report
**MANDATORY READ:** Load `references/templates/audit_worker_report_template.md`.
Write JSON summary per `references/audit_summary_contract.md`. In managed mode the caller passes both `runId` and `summaryArtifactPath`; in standalone mode the worker generates its own run-scoped artifact path per shared contract.
```
# Build markdown report in memory with:
# - AUDIT-META (extended: score [penalty-based] + diagnostic score_compliance/completeness/quality/implementation)
# - Checks table (layer_leakage, missing_dto, entity_leakage, error_contracts, redundant_overloads)
# - Findings table (issues sorted by severity)
# - DATA-EXTENDED: issues array with principle + domain fields (for cross-domain aggregation)
IF domain_mode == "domain-aware":
Write to {output_dir}/643-api-contract-{current_domain}.md
ELSE:
Write to {output_dir}/643-api-contract.md
```
### Phase 5: Return Summary
```
Report written: .hex-skills/runtime-artifacts/runs/{run_id}/audit-report/643-api-contract-users.md
Score: 6.75/10 (C:65 K:70 Q:55 I:80) | Issues: 4 (H:2 M:1 L:1)
```
## Critical Rules
Apply the already-loaded `references/audit_worker_core_contract.md`.
- **Architecture-level only:** Focus on service boundaries, not internal implementation
- **Read before score:** Never score without reading actual service code
- **Scope boundary:** SKIP duplication findings
- **Detection patterns:** Use language-specific Grep from detection_patterns.md
- **Domain-aware:** When domain_mode="domain-aware", scan only scan_path, tag findings with domain
- **Unique angle:** Audit service/API boundary contracts only. Do not audit code duplication, package health, dependency topology, or runtime operations.
- **Action required:** Every finding uses `ADD_DTO`, `STOP_ENTITY_LEAK`, or `STANDARDIZE_ERROR_CONTRACT`.
## Definition of Done
Apply the already-loaded `references/audit_worker_core_contract.md`.
- [ ] Service boundaries discovered (API, service, domain layers)
- [ ] Method signatures extracted and analyzed
- [ ] All 5 rules checked using detection_patterns.md
- [ ] Scope boundary applied (no duplication findings)
- [ ] 4 scores calculated with justification
- [ ] Issues identified with severity, location, suggestion, effort
- [ ] If domain-aware: findings tagged with domain field
- [ ] Report written to `{output_dir}/643-api-contract[-{domain}].md` (atomic single Write call)
- [ ] Summary written per contract
## Reference Files
- Detection patterns: `references/detection_patterns.md`
- Scoring rules: `references/audit_scoring.md`
---
**Version:** 2.0.0
**Last Updated:** 2026-02-08
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!