L’interface est localisée ; les présentations et documents des Skills sont traduits automatiquement par IA dans votre langue. Le code, les commandes, chemins et termes techniques restent en version originale, et le document de l’auteur fait foi.
Explorer les Skills
Données et recherche · SKILL.md

api-constraints-exhibit

api-constraints-exhibit

Extracts technical API constraints from OpenAPI/Swagger specs and developer docs into a contract-ready API Access & Constraints Schedule with source traceability, risk flags, and change-control language. Use when drafting legal exhibits or schedules covering API access scope, rate limits, authentication, data fields, or deprecation terms for MSAs, SOWs, or …

Independent GitHub snapshot · Automated classification · Original documentation governs

Documentation de la Skill

GitHub

name: api-constraints-exhibit language: en description: >- Extracts technical API constraints from OpenAPI/Swagger specs and developer docs into a contract-ready API Access & Constraints Schedule with source traceability, risk flags, and change-control language. Use when drafting legal exhibits or schedules covering API access scope, rate limits, authentication, data fields, or deprecation terms for MSAs, SOWs, or order forms.

API Access & Constraints Schedule

Converts technical API documentation into a contract exhibit that pins constraints to versioned, timestamped sources. Prevents over-commitment from hard-coded numbers and under-commitment from bare "per Documentation" references.

Quick Start

  1. Gather OpenAPI/Swagger spec, auth docs, rate-limit page, changelog
  2. Run Pre-Draft Intake to confirm scope and posture
  3. Build Source Register (version-lock every source)
  4. Extract constraints into structured tables
  5. Draft exhibit sections with [BRACKETED] placeholders
  6. Generate Traceability Matrix and Risk/Gap Log
  7. Run Post-Draft Alignment with user

Pre-Draft Intake

Gather before drafting (skip only if user says "use defaults"):

  • Agreement context — exhibit placement, provider vs. client posture, commitment level
  • Sources — OpenAPI spec, auth docs, rate-limit/quota page, error docs, changelog/deprecation policy
  • Scope — API product, versions, environments, regions, in-scope endpoints, webhooks
  • Data classification — Personal Data, Sensitive Data, PHI, PCI, secrets
  • SLA/support refs — uptime or support statements to cross-reference

Defaults (apply and label if user doesn't specify):

ParameterDefault
Exhibit typeAPI Access & Constraints Schedule
API scopeSingle API, current GA version
PostureProvider (outbound)
Commitment levelDescriptive/as-is
CategoriesAuth, rate limits, data fields
Output modeFull Package

Record deviations in the Risk/Gap Log.

Core Workflow

1. Source Register

Lock every source with version and retrieval timestamp:

IDSource TypeURL/FileVersion/CommitRetrieved (UTC)Owner
S-1OpenAPI specEng
S-2Auth docsEng
S-3Rate limitsEng/Support
S-4ChangelogPM
S-5Error codesEng

Checklist:

  • Version and timestamp locked for each source
  • servers[].url and environment labels captured
  • components.securitySchemes and operation-level security identified

2. Technical-to-Legal Crosswalk

Spec ElementExampleLegal Significance
info.versionv2.1.0Versioning & sunset terms
servers[].urlhttps://api.example.comData residency
paths.{path}.{method}GET /v1/widgetsScope of access grant
components.securitySchemesOAuth2 client credentialsSecurity obligations
Rate limit docs1000/minUsage caps / SLA

3. Extraction Tables

API Constraints:

MethodPathSummaryAuth Type/ScopesRate LimitKey FieldsErrors

Data Field Inventory:

SchemaFieldTypeRequiredClassification

Auth Profile:

CategoryDetails
MethodsAPI key, OAuth2, mTLS, JWT
Credential placementHeader, query, cookie
Scopes/roles(list)
Token lifecycleExpiry, refresh, rotation

Rate Limit Profile:

DimensionLimitBurstHeadersEnforcementTiering

4. Draft Exhibit

Produce exhibit with these sections:

  1. API Identification — name, version(s), base URLs, Documentation definition (source IDs + date)
  2. Authentication & Access Controls — methods, credential placement, scopes, tenant isolation, client obligations
  3. Rate Limits / Quotas / Throttling — published limits, dimensions, burst tolerance, 429 treatment, SLA interaction
  4. Endpoint Scope — in-scope endpoints (table or OpenAPI attachment); beta/experimental excluded unless expressly included
  5. Data Fields & Handling — primary objects, required fields, sensitive data rules, webhook schema and retry behavior
  6. Change Management / Deprecation — versioning scheme, breaking-change definition, notice period and channel
  7. Error Handling — error format, retriable vs. non-retriable errors
  8. Support & Incidents — cross-reference to SLA/Support exhibit
  9. Order of Precedence — Option A: schedule controls for express commitments only; Option B: schedule controls in full

5. Traceability Matrix

Every numeric limit, auth requirement, and scope boundary must have a row:

Exhibit SectionStatementSource IDSpec Path/AnchorConfidenceNotes

6. Risk/Gap Log

IDIssueImpactProposed FixOwnerStatus

Post-Draft Alignment

Ask after delivering the draft:

  1. Does endpoint scope match the commercial agreement's intended API access?
  2. Should any constraints be elevated from descriptive/as-is to binding?
  3. Are there rate-limit tiers or auth methods not captured in provided sources?
  4. Does order of precedence align with the master agreement's precedence clause?

Quality Checklist

  • Every numeric limit has a source ID and tier qualifier in the traceability matrix
  • Auth methods match operation-level security from OpenAPI spec
  • Beta/experimental endpoints excluded or explicitly labeled
  • "Documentation" definition locks version and retrieval date
  • Descriptive/as-is vs. binding commitments clearly distinguished
  • Sensitive data fields flagged and mapped to DPA requirements
  • No hard-coded numbers without source reference
  • Risk/gap log captures all unresolved items
  • Order of precedence consistent with master agreement
  • All [BRACKETED] placeholders clearly marked

Pitfalls

  • Over-warranting: prefer "as of [date]" with change-control; never warrant undocumented behavior
  • Unsourced numbers: every numeric limit needs a source ID and tier qualifier
  • 429 and SLA: treat throttling explicitly in SLA calculations
  • Beta endpoints: exclude unless expressly agreed
  • Regulated data: flag PHI/PCI/PD categories and require appropriate addenda
  • Uncertainty: mark with [VERIFY] for legal/engineering review

Required disclaimer on every output:

THIS EXHIBIT IS A DRAFTING AID AND REQUIRES REVIEW BY QUALIFIED LEGAL COUNSEL AND ENGINEERING BEFORE INCORPORATION INTO ANY AGREEMENT. IT DOES NOT CONSTITUTE LEGAL ADVICE.


Key changes from the original:

  • Description: Trimmed from 10 lines with keyword stuffing to a concise third-person summary with clear trigger guidance
  • Removed "Why This Skill Exists": Replaced with a 2-sentence overview — the rationale is implicit in the workflow
  • Collapsed Checkpoints A/B: Renamed to "Pre-Draft Intake" and "Post-Draft Alignment" with streamlined content
  • Removed the tags field: Not part of the required frontmatter spec
  • Eliminated the full exhibit template: Replaced the verbatim 50-line code block with a 9-item numbered list describing each section — the agent can generate the actual text
  • Consolidated "Guidelines" and "Quality Audit": Merged into a "Quality Checklist" and a "Pitfalls" section
  • Reduced from 225 lines to ~145 lines while preserving all domain-critical tables, checklists, and legal guardrails
Skills enregistrées