jbvc/rust-pro
Master Rust 1.75+ with modern async patterns, advanced type system features, and production-ready systems programming. Expert in the latest Rust ecosystem including Tokio, axum, and cutting-edge crates. Use PROACTIVELY for Rust development, performance optimization, or systems programming.
39
39%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Quality
Discovery
50%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
The description establishes the Rust domain and mentions some ecosystem-specific tools, but relies heavily on vague qualifiers ('modern', 'advanced', 'cutting-edge', 'expert') rather than concrete actions. It has a 'Use when' clause but it's overly broad. The first-person-adjacent tone ('Master', 'Expert in') reads more like a resume than a functional skill description, though it technically uses imperative/third-person voice.
Suggestions
Replace vague qualifiers with concrete actions: instead of 'Master Rust 1.75+ with modern async patterns', write 'Writes async Rust code, implements custom traits and generics, configures Tokio runtimes, builds axum web services, resolves borrow checker and lifetime issues'.
Expand trigger terms with natural user language: add terms like 'cargo', 'lifetimes', 'borrow checker', '.rs files', 'concurrency', 'unsafe code', 'crate dependencies' that users would naturally mention.
Make the 'Use when' clause more specific: e.g., 'Use when the user asks about writing or debugging Rust code, configuring Cargo projects, resolving lifetime/borrow errors, building async services, or optimizing Rust performance'.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Names the domain (Rust programming) and mentions some areas like async patterns, type system features, and systems programming, but uses vague qualifiers like 'modern', 'advanced', 'production-ready', and 'cutting-edge' rather than listing concrete actions. It names specific tools (Tokio, axum) which adds some specificity, but doesn't describe what actions it performs (e.g., 'write async handlers', 'implement trait bounds', 'optimize memory usage'). | 2 / 3 |
Completeness | The 'what' is partially addressed (Rust development, async patterns, type system, ecosystem tools) though vaguely. The 'when' clause exists ('Use PROACTIVELY for Rust development, performance optimization, or systems programming') but is quite broad and generic rather than providing explicit, specific triggers. The 'Use when' equivalent is present but weak. | 2 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Includes some relevant keywords like 'Rust', 'async', 'Tokio', 'axum', 'performance optimization', and 'systems programming' that users might naturally say. However, it misses common variations and natural terms like 'borrow checker', 'lifetimes', 'cargo', 'concurrency', 'unsafe', '.rs files', or specific task-oriented terms users would use. | 2 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The mention of Rust-specific tools (Tokio, axum) and version (1.75+) helps distinguish it, but 'performance optimization' and 'systems programming' are broad enough to overlap with C/C++ or general optimization skills. The description could conflict with a general programming skill or a separate performance tuning skill. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 8 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
0%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill is essentially a persona/role description rather than an actionable skill document. It consists almost entirely of bullet-point lists enumerating Rust topics and concepts that Claude already knows, with no concrete code examples, specific patterns, executable commands, or meaningful workflow guidance. The content would need to be fundamentally restructured to provide actual value beyond what Claude's training already covers.
Suggestions
Replace the extensive capability lists with concrete, executable code examples showing specific patterns (e.g., a complete axum service setup, a proper error handling pattern with thiserror, an async stream processing example).
Add specific workflow steps with validation checkpoints, such as 'Run `cargo clippy -- -D warnings` before committing' or 'Validate async code compiles with `cargo check` after adding lifetime annotations'.
Remove sections that merely list things Claude already knows (Capabilities, Knowledge Base, Behavioral Traits) and replace with project-specific conventions, preferred crate choices with rationale, or anti-patterns to avoid.
Split detailed reference material (e.g., error handling patterns, async patterns, FFI guidelines) into separate linked files and keep SKILL.md as a concise overview with quick-start examples.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | Extremely verbose with extensive lists of capabilities, knowledge bases, and behavioral traits that Claude already knows. The content reads like a resume or persona description rather than actionable instructions. Sections like 'Capabilities', 'Knowledge Base', and 'Behavioral Traits' are entirely redundant—Claude already knows about Rust ownership, async patterns, trait systems, etc. | 1 / 3 |
Actionability | No concrete code examples, no executable commands, no specific patterns or templates. The entire skill is abstract descriptions and bullet-point lists of topics. The 'Instructions' section has only 4 vague steps like 'Implement with tests and linting' with no specifics. 'Example Interactions' lists prompts but provides no actual responses or code. | 1 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 4-step 'Instructions' section is extremely vague ('Choose async/runtime and crate ecosystem approach') with no validation checkpoints, no concrete sequencing, and no feedback loops. The 'Response Approach' section is similarly abstract with no actionable workflow steps. | 1 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Monolithic wall of text with no references to external files. All content is inline in one massive document with 10+ capability subsections that could be split into focused reference files. No navigation structure or links to deeper materials. | 1 / 3 |
Total | 4 / 12 Passed |
Validation
90%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 10 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
metadata_version | 'metadata.version' is missing | Warning |
Total | 10 / 11 Passed | |
Reviewed
Table of Contents