BF rust-code-review
Reviews Rust code for ownership, borrowing, lifetime, error handling, trait design, unsafe usage, and common mistakes. Use when reviewing .rs files, checking borrow checker issues, error handling patterns, or trait implementations. Covers Rust 2024 edition patterns and modern idioms.
As a process F 46/100 · Will not run — References files that are not bundled: ../review-verification-protocol/SKILL.md, ../rust-best-practices/SKILL.md, references/performance.md
How to improve
- The SKILL.md body is over 5,000 tokens: move reference detail into references/ and load it when needed.
- The text references files that are not there: add them or drop the references.
- Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
- A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.
Guard findings · 0
✓ No critical or high findings
Files scanned: 15. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
body-longSKILL.md body ≈ 5583 tokens (recommended < 5000); move details to references/ - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: ../review-verification-protocol/SKILL.md - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: ../rust-best-practices/SKILL.md - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: references/performance.md - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: references/clippy-config.md - warning
missing-refreference to a missing file: references/type-state-pattern.md
Process rating: all ten parameters 46/100
- 0Tools and files. 5 referenced file(s) missing: ../review-verification-protocol/SKILL.md, ../rust-best-practices/SKILL.md, references/performance.md
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 30Running it twice. 23 mutating operations with no state check
- 50When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
- 50Failures and branches. 0 branches, has a failure section
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 5583 tokens
- 85Steps. 170 steps, 1 vague phrases
- 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
- low 10 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
- low The response is described with custom markup (5 tags): a typed call is more reliable
Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.
Quality signals
- +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- -5TODO / placeholder text left in the skill
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +3Description length 284: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 27 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 170 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +4Has examples (1 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (13 of 13)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 64.