About sf-apex
A Salesforce skill for generating and reviewing production Apex classes, triggers, async jobs, and tests. It emphasizes bulk safety, sharing and security, test coverage, and alignment with the repository's existing architecture.
Key features
- 01Generates and refactors Apex
- 02Designs triggers and async jobs
- 03Reviews bulk safety and security
- 04Guides test classes and assertions
- 05Uses existing project patterns
Use cases
- 01Creating a Queueable or Batch job
- 02Reviewing trigger bulkification
- 03Adding security-aware Apex logic
- 04Building positive, negative, and bulk tests
Install
Copy the command and run it in a terminal.
npx skills add https:/ / github.com/ jaganpro/ sf-skills --skill sf-apexAfter installing, type/sf-apexin Claude Code to confirm it loaded.
Bundled files
References and scripts installed along with SKILL.md.
CREDITS.mdREADME.mdassets/apex-class.clsbatch.clsinvocable-method.clsqueueable.clsselector.clsservice.clstest-class.clstest-data-factory.clstrigger-action.clstrigger.triggerhooks/scripts/apex-lsp-validate.pyllm_pattern_validator.pypost-tool-validate.pyprettier-format.pyvalidate_apex.pyreferences/anti-patterns.mdautomation-density-guide.mdbest-practices.mdbulkification-guide.mdcode-review-checklist.mdcode-smells-guide.mddesign-patterns.mdflow-integration.mdllm-anti-patterns.mdnaming-conventions.mdpatterns-deep-dive.mdsecurity-guide.mdsecurity-quick-reference.mdDetails
From the project READMEsf-apex: Salesforce Apex Code Generation and Review
Use this skill when the user needs production Apex: new classes, triggers, selectors, services, async jobs, invocable methods, test classes, or evidence-based review of existing .cls / .trigger code.
When This Skill Owns the Task
Use sf-apex when the work involves:
- Apex class generation or refactoring
- trigger design and trigger-framework decisions
@InvocableMethod, Queueable, Batch, Schedulable, or test-class work- review of bulkification, sharing, security, testing, or maintainability
Delegate elsewhere when the user is:
- editing LWC JavaScript / HTML / CSS → sf-lwc
- building Flow XML or Flow orchestration → sf-flow
- writing SOQL only → sf-soql
- deploying or validating metadata to orgs → sf-deploy
Required Context to Gather First
Ask for or infer:
- class type: trigger, service, selector, batch, queueable, schedulable, invocable, test
- target object(s) and business goal
- whether code is net-new, refactor, or fix
- org / API constraints if known
- expected test coverage or deployment target
Before authoring, inspect the project shape:
- existing classes / triggers
- current trigger framework or handler pattern
- related tests, flows, and selectors
- whether TAF is already in use
Recommended Workflow
1. Discover local architecture
Check for:
- existing trigger handlers / frameworks
- service-selector-domain conventions
- related tests and data factories
- invocable or async patterns already used in the repo
2. Choose the smallest correct pattern
| Need | Preferred pattern |
|---|---|
| simple reusable logic | service class |
| query-heavy data access | selector |
| single object trigger behavior | one trigger + handler / TAF action |
| Flow needs complex logic | @InvocableMethod |
| background processing | Queueable by default |
| very large datasets | Batch Apex or Database.Cursor patterns |
| repeatable verification | dedicated test class + test data factory |
3. Author with guardrails
Generate code that is:
- bulk-safe
- sharing-aware
- CRUD/FLS-safe where applicable
- testable in isolation
- consistent with project naming and layering
4. Validate and score
Evaluate against the 150-point rubric before handoff.
5. Hand off deploy/test next steps
When org validation is needed, hand off to:
- sf-testing for test execution loops
- sf-deploy for deploy / dry-run / verification
Generation Guardrails
Never generate these without explicitly stopping and explaining the problem:
| Anti-pattern | Why it blocks |
|---|---|
| SOQL in loops | governor-limit failure |
| DML in loops | governor-limit failure |
| missing sharing model | security / data exposure risk |
| hardcoded IDs | deployment and portability failure |
empty catch blocks | silent failure / poor observability |
| string-built SOQL with user input | injection risk |
| tests without assertions | false-positive test suite |
Default fix direction:
- query once, operate on collections
- use
with sharingunless justified otherwise - use bind variables and
WITH USER_MODEwhere appropriate - create assertions for positive, negative, and bulk cases
See references/anti-patterns.md and references/security-guide.md.
High-Signal Build Rules
Trigger architecture
- Prefer one trigger per object.
- If TAF is already installed and used, extend it instead of inventing a second trigger pattern.
- Triggers should delegate logic; avoid heavy business logic directly in trigger bodies.
Async choice
| Scenario | Default |
|---|---|
| standard async work | Queueable |
| very large record processing | Batch Apex |
| recurring schedule | Scheduled Flow or Schedulable |
| post-job cleanup | Finalizer |
| long-running Lightning callouts | Continuation |
Testing minimums
Use the PNB pattern for every feature:
- Positive path
- Negative / error path
- Bulk path (251+ records where relevant)
Modern Apex expectations
Prefer current idioms when available:
- safe navigation:
obj?.Field__c - null coalescing:
value ?? fallback Assert.*over legacy assertion styleWITH USER_MODEand explicit security handling where relevant
Output Format
When finishing, report in this order:
- What was created or reviewed
- Files changed
- Key design decisions
- Risk / guardrail notes
- Test guidance
- Deployment guidance
Suggested shape:
Apex work: <summary>
Files: <paths>
Design: <pattern / framework choices>
Risks: <security, bulkification, async, dependency notes>
Tests: <what to run / add>
Deploy: <dry-run or next step>
LSP Validation Note
This skill supports an LSP-assisted authoring loop for .cls and .trigger files:
- syntax issues can be detected immediately after write/edit
- the skill can auto-fix common syntax errors in a short loop
- semantic quality still depends on the 150-point review rubric
Full guide: references/troubleshooting.md
Cross-Skill Integration
| Need | Delegate to | Reason |
|---|---|---|
| describe objects / fields first | sf-metadata | avoid coding against wrong schema |
| seed bulk or edge-case data | sf-data | create realistic test datasets |
| run Apex tests / fix failing tests | sf-testing | execute and iterate on failures |
| deploy to org | sf-deploy | validation and deployment orchestration |
| build Flow that calls Apex | sf-flow | declarative orchestration |
| build LWC that calls Apex | sf-lwc | UI/controller integration |
Reference Map
Start here
- references/patterns-deep-dive.md
- references/security-guide.md
- references/bulkification-guide.md
- references/testing-patterns.md
High-signal checklists
Specialized patterns
- references/trigger-actions-framework.md
- references/automation-density-guide.md
- references/flow-integration.md
- references/triangle-pattern.md
- references/design-patterns.md
- references/solid-principles.md
Troubleshooting / validation
Score Guide
| Score | Meaning |
|---|---|
| 120+ | strong production-ready Apex |
| 90–119 | good implementation, review before deploy |
| 67–89 | acceptable but needs improvement |
| < 67 | block deployment |