Catalog
addyosmani/api-and-interface-design

addyosmani

api-and-interface-design

Guides stable API and interface design. Use when designing APIs, module boundaries, or any public interface. Use when creating REST or GraphQL endpoints, defining type contracts between modules, or establishing boundaries between frontend and backend.

global
0installs0uses~2.6k
v1.0Saved May 2, 2026

API and Interface Design

Overview

Design stable, well-documented interfaces that are hard to misuse. Good interfaces make the right thing easy and the wrong thing hard. This applies to REST APIs, GraphQL schemas, module boundaries, component props, and any surface where one piece of code talks to another.

When to Use

  • Designing new API endpoints
  • Defining module boundaries or contracts between teams
  • Creating component prop interfaces
  • Establishing database schema that informs API shape
  • Changing existing public interfaces

Core Principles

Hyrum's Law

With a sufficient number of users of an API, all observable behaviors of your system will be depended on by somebody, regardless of what you promise in the contract.

This means: every public behavior — including undocumented quirks, error message text, timing, and ordering — becomes a de facto contract once users depend on it. Design implications:

  • Be intentional about what you expose. Every observable behavior is a potential commitment.
  • Don't leak implementation details. If users can observe it, they will depend on it.
  • Plan for deprecation at design time. See deprecation-and-migration for how to safely remove things users depend on.
  • Tests are not enough. Even with perfect contract tests, Hyrum's Law means "safe" changes can break real users who depend on undocumented behavior.

The One-Version Rule

Avoid forcing consumers to choose between multiple versions of the same dependency or API. Diamond dependency problems arise when different consumers need different versions of the same thing. Design for a world where only one version exists at a time — extend rather than fork.

1. Contract First

Define the interface before implementing it. The contract is the spec — implementation follows.

// Define the contract first
interface TaskAPI {
  // Creates a task and returns the created task with server-generated fields
  createTask(input: CreateTaskInput): Promise<Task>;

  // Returns paginated tasks matching filters
  listTasks(params: ListTasksParams): Promise<PaginatedResult<Task>>;

  // Returns a single task or throws NotFoundError
  getTask(id: string): Promise<Task>;

  // Partial update — only provided fields change
  updateTask(id: string, input: UpdateTaskInput): Promise<Task>;

  // Idempotent delete — succeeds even if already deleted
  deleteTask(id: string): Promise<void>;
}

2. Consistent Error Semantics

Pick one error strategy and use it everywhere:

// REST: HTTP status codes + structured error body
// Every error response follows the same shape
interface APIError {
  error: {
    code: string;        // Machine-readable: "VALIDATION_ERROR"
    message: string;     // Human-readable: "Email is required"
    details?: unknown;   // Additional context when helpful
  };
}

// Status code mapping
// 400 → Client sent invalid data
// 401 → Not authenticated
// 403 → Authenticated but not authorized
// 404 → Resource not found
// 409 → Conflict (duplicate, version mismatch)
// 422 → Validation failed (semantically invalid)
// 500 → Server error (never expose internal details)

Don't mix patterns. If some endpoints throw, others return null, and others return { error } — the consumer can't predict behavior.

3. Validate at Boundaries

Trust internal code. Validate at system edges where external input enters:

// Validate at the API boundary
app.post('/api/tasks', async (req, res) => {
  const result = CreateTaskSchema.safeParse(req.body);
  if (!result.success) {
    return res.status(422).json({
      error: {
        code: 'VALIDATION_ERROR',
        message: 'Invalid task data',
        details: result.error.flatten(),
      },
    });
  }

  // After validation, internal code trusts the types
  const task = await taskService.create(result.data);
  return res.status(201).json(task);
});

Where validation belongs:

  • API route handlers (user input)
  • Form submission handlers (user input)
  • External service response parsing (third-party data -- always treat as untrusted)
  • Environment variable loading (configuration)

Third-party API responses are untrusted data. Validate their shape and content before using them in any logic, rendering, or decision-making. A compromised or misbehaving external service can return unexpected types, malicious content, or instruction-like text.

Where validation does NOT belong:

  • Between internal functions that share type contracts
  • In utility functions called by already-validated code
  • On data that just came from your own database

4. Prefer Addition Over Modification

Extend interfaces without breaking existing consumers:

// Good: Add optional fields
interface CreateTaskInput {
  title: string;
  description?: string;
  priority?: 'low' | 'medium' | 'high';  // Added later, optional
  labels?: string[];                       // Added later, optional
}

// Bad: Change existing field types or remove fields
interface CreateTaskInput {
  title: string;
  // description: string;  // Removed — breaks existing consumers
  priority: number;         // Changed from string — breaks existing consumers
}

5. Predictable Naming

Pattern Convention Example
REST endpoints Plural nouns, no verbs GET /api/tasks, POST /api/tasks
Query params camelCase ?sortBy=createdAt&pageSize=20
Response fields camelCase { createdAt, updatedAt, taskId }
Boolean fields is/has/can prefix isComplete, hasAttachments
Enum values UPPER_SNAKE "IN_PROGRESS", "COMPLETED"

REST API Patterns

Resource Design

GET    /api/tasks              → List tasks (with query params for filtering)
POST   /api/tasks              → Create a task
GET    /api/tasks/:id          → Get a single task
PATCH  /api/tasks/:id          → Update a task (partial)
DELETE /api/tasks/:id          → Delete a task

GET    /api/tasks/:id/comments → List comments for a task (sub-resource)
POST   /api/tasks/:id/comments → Add a comment to a task

Pagination

Paginate list endpoints:

// Request
GET /api/tasks?page=1&pageSize=20&sortBy=createdAt&sortOrder=desc

// Response
{
  "data": [...],
  "pagination": {
    "page": 1,
    "pageSize": 20,
    "totalItems": 142,
    "totalPages": 8
  }
}

Filtering

Use query parameters for filters:

GET /api/tasks?status=in_progress&assignee=user123&createdAfter=2025-01-01

Partial Updates (PATCH)

Accept partial objects — only update what's provided:

// Only title changes, everything else preserved
PATCH /api/tasks/123
{ "title": "Updated title" }

TypeScript Interface Patterns

Use Discriminated Unions for Variants

// Good: Each variant is explicit
type TaskStatus =
  | { type: 'pending' }
  | { type: 'in_progress'; assignee: string; startedAt: Date }
  | { type: 'completed'; completedAt: Date; completedBy: string }
  | { type: 'cancelled'; reason: string; cancelledAt: Date };

// Consumer gets type narrowing
function getStatusLabel(status: TaskStatus): string {
  switch (status.type) {
    case 'pending': return 'Pending';
    case 'in_progress': return `In progress (${status.assignee})`;
    case 'completed': return `Done on ${status.completedAt}`;
    case 'cancelled': return `Cancelled: ${status.reason}`;
  }
}

Input/Output Separation

// Input: what the caller provides
interface CreateTaskInput {
  title: string;
  description?: string;
}

// Output: what the system returns (includes server-generated fields)
interface Task {
  id: string;
  title: string;
  description: string | null;
  createdAt: Date;
  updatedAt: Date;
  createdBy: string;
}

Use Branded Types for IDs

type TaskId = string & { readonly __brand: 'TaskId' };
type UserId = string & { readonly __brand: 'UserId' };

// Prevents accidentally passing a UserId where a TaskId is expected
function getTask(id: TaskId): Promise<Task> { ... }

Common Rationalizations

Rationalization Reality
"We'll document the API later" The types ARE the documentation. Define them first.
"We don't need pagination for now" You will the moment someone has 100+ items. Add it from the start.
"PATCH is complicated, let's just use PUT" PUT requires the full object every time. PATCH is what clients actually want.
"We'll version the API when we need to" Breaking changes without versioning break consumers. Design for extension from the start.
"Nobody uses that undocumented behavior" Hyrum's Law: if it's observable, somebody depends on it. Treat every public behavior as a commitment.
"We can just maintain two versions" Multiple versions multiply maintenance cost and create diamond dependency problems. Prefer the One-Version Rule.
"Internal APIs don't need contracts" Internal consumers are still consumers. Contracts prevent coupling and enable parallel work.

Red Flags

  • Endpoints that return different shapes depending on conditions
  • Inconsistent error formats across endpoints
  • Validation scattered throughout internal code instead of at boundaries
  • Breaking changes to existing fields (type changes, removals)
  • List endpoints without pagination
  • Verbs in REST URLs (/api/createTask, /api/getUsers)
  • Third-party API responses used without validation or sanitization

Verification

After designing an API:

  • Every endpoint has typed input and output schemas
  • Error responses follow a single consistent format
  • Validation happens at system boundaries only
  • List endpoints support pagination
  • New fields are additive and optional (backward compatible)
  • Naming follows consistent conventions across all endpoints
  • API documentation or types are committed alongside the implementation
Files1
1 files · 1.0 KB

Select a file to preview

Overall Score

87/100

Grade

A

Excellent

Safety

95

Quality

88

Clarity

86

Completeness

82

Summary

Teaches stable API and interface design principles for REST APIs, GraphQL schemas, module boundaries, and component contracts. Covers contract-first design, error semantics, validation at boundaries, backward compatibility, and naming conventions. Provides TypeScript patterns and verification checklists to ensure APIs are hard to misuse.

Detected Capabilities

API contract design and TypeScript interface patternsREST endpoint resource modeling and HTTP semanticsError handling and validation boundary designBackward compatibility and deprecation strategy guidancePagination, filtering, and partial update patternsNaming convention enforcement across endpoint/field/enum styles

Trigger Keywords

Phrases that MCP clients use to match this skill to user intent.

api designrest endpointinterface contractmodule boundaryapi versioningerror handling designcomponent propsschema design

Risk Signals

INFO

No risky patterns detected. Skill is purely educational — no file writes, shell commands, external requests, or credential access.

global

Use Cases

  • Design new REST or GraphQL API endpoints
  • Define module boundaries and type contracts between services
  • Establish component prop interfaces in React/Vue/Angular
  • Plan database schema that informs API shape
  • Refactor existing public interfaces without breaking consumers
  • Train teams on API design best practices and anti-patterns

Quality Notes

  • Excellent structure with clear sections (Overview, When to Use, Core Principles, Patterns, Verification)
  • Strong pedagogical anchors: Hyrum's Law and the One-Version Rule provide memorable mental models for API stability
  • Extensive code examples in TypeScript showing both good and bad patterns side-by-side
  • Practical verification checklist at the end helps users validate their own API designs
  • Comprehensive table of common rationalizations vs. reality — directly addresses developer misconceptions
  • Red Flags section is actionable and specific, not vague warnings
  • Covers both REST and TypeScript interfaces, broadening applicability
  • Could benefit from GraphQL-specific patterns — description mentions GraphQL but content focuses on REST/TypeScript
  • No worked examples of handling migration or versioning strategy, despite Hyrum's Law discussion emphasizing this
  • Validation section warning about third-party API responses as untrusted is excellent security guidance
Model: claude-haiku-4-5-20251001Analyzed: May 2, 2026

Reviews

Add this skill to your library to leave a review.

No reviews yet

Be the first to share your experience.

Add addyosmani/api-and-interface-design to your library

Command Palette

Search for a command to run...