Sentry Document API Endpoint

Publisher: Sentry · Editorial profile by AI Tools Ratings · Review method

What task is this skill designed for?

Add or improve endpoint documentation in the Sentry backend, including schema annotations and typed response structures. Best for contributors working within its Django REST Framework and OpenAPI conventions.

What input and output should you expect?

Input: Provide route, implementation, permissions, response serializers, existing type definitions and desired documentation visibility. Include examples with dummy identifiers and no real tokens.

Output: Proposed endpoint annotations, response types and documentation changes aligned with actual behavior, plus relevant validation steps.

What does it need to run?

A Sentry-compatible backend checkout with its documentation and test tooling. This is a project-specific workflow, not a universal OpenAPI generator.

Publisher documents Claude Code installation and skills.sh support for compatible agents including Cursor, Cline and GitHub Copilot. Host permissions and invocation behavior still require validation.

How should you approach installation?

1. Read the pinned SKILL.md and repository LICENSE; compare project-specific conventions with your own instructions.
2. Follow the publisher installation guidance for your host, retaining the full skill folder and references; begin in a disposable repository with minimal permissions.
3. Run the suggested draft or read-only trial, review its acceptance checklist, and grant write or remote permissions only for the intended task.

Installation guide: discovery, dependencies and runtime checks

What files, accounts or data can it access?

Can edit backend and documentation code; the full source workflow also describes API calls and validation commands. Public/private endpoint visibility is a product decision and must be authorized independently of writing documentation.

What does the skill cost?

No separate Skill purchase price is stated in the reviewed repository. The host agent subscription or model usage is separate; repository services and any authorized CI jobs may add costs. A local drafting trial does not require paid remote execution.

What are its limits and alternatives?

A schema can misrepresent optional fields, nullability or identifier types if inferred from one response. Do not promote a private endpoint to public merely to make generated docs appear. Avoid production credentials in examples or model context.

Use your own framework OpenAPI tooling for another backend, or manually document a stable API contract when implementation conventions differ.

What could you ask in a small trial?

Try this with a small sample:

Draft documentation for this synthetic Sentry endpoint using only the supplied route and serializer. Preserve current private visibility, distinguish omitted fields from null values, and reuse existing response types. Do not call a live endpoint or change visibility.

How would you verify the result?

1. Schema requiredness and nullability agree with actual response construction.
2. Existing canonical types are reused and identifiers keep their documented representation.
3. Visibility is unchanged and suggested validation is separate from results actually observed.

Use a baseline and record acceptance evidence before treating a successful task as a reliable workflow.

Which source and license were checked?

Read the reviewed SKILL.md at its pinned commit · Complete reviewed folder

Repository and current publisher guidance

Checked: 2026-10-28

Apache-2.0 — repository LICENSE at the reviewed commit. License evidence

Report an error, license concern or request a new review.