Everyone is jumping on that, but (while I had to look it up too) 'ept' actually is a real word:

from the OED:

ept, adj. Pronunciation: /ɛpt/ Etymology: Back-formation < inept adj.

  Used as a deliberate antonym of ‘inept’: adroit, appropriate, effective.

1938 E. B. White Let. Oct. (1976) 183, I am much obliged..to you for your warm, courteous, and ept treatment of a rather weak, skinny subject.

1966 Time 30 Sept. 7/1 With the exception of one or two semantic twisters, I think it is a first-rate job—definitely ept, ane and ert.

1976 N.Y. Times Mag. 6 June 15 The obvious answer is summed up by a White House official's sardonic crack: ‘Politically, we're not very ept.’

We have the term "adept" though, which is actually in common usage and fits the intended meaning here...

That was…surprisingly thorough.

That is the point of the OED: to be comprehensive and include real usages.

That's the point of any half-decent dictionary.

The OED is a gold standard, though.

James Murray was the true Scotsman.

Isn't it more likely that he just mispelled "apt".

Well, ept is obviously a back-formation and a clever and amusing one.

Etymology is straight from Latin: ineptus, which is prefix in- plus aptus (fitting or suitable). Interestingly there's also inapt which is quite similar.

edit: aheilbut's research on this is much more thorough.

I used a similar back figuring when describing a co-worker who was in the wrong job... "He's not inept, he is inapt"