swiftui-performance-audit
Audit and improve SwiftUI runtime performance from code review and architecture. Use for requests to diagnose slow rendering, janky scrolling, high CPU/memory usage, excessive view updates, or layout thrash in SwiftUI apps, and to provide guidance for user-run Instruments profiling when code review alone is insufficient.
88
85%
Does it follow best practices?
Impact
Pending
No eval scenarios have been run
Passed
No known issues
Quality
Discovery
100%Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.
This is an excellent skill description that clearly defines its scope (SwiftUI runtime performance auditing), lists specific problem types it addresses, and includes an explicit 'Use for' clause with natural trigger terms. It uses proper third-person voice throughout and is concise without being vague. The description would allow Claude to confidently select this skill when users describe SwiftUI performance issues while avoiding false matches for general SwiftUI development questions.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | Lists multiple specific concrete actions: audit/improve runtime performance, diagnose slow rendering, janky scrolling, high CPU/memory usage, excessive view updates, layout thrash, and guidance for Instruments profiling. These are concrete, actionable capabilities. | 3 / 3 |
Completeness | Clearly answers both what ('Audit and improve SwiftUI runtime performance from code review and architecture') and when ('Use for requests to diagnose slow rendering, janky scrolling, high CPU/memory usage, excessive view updates, or layout thrash in SwiftUI apps'). The 'Use for' clause explicitly defines trigger conditions. | 3 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural terms users would say: 'slow rendering', 'janky scrolling', 'high CPU/memory usage', 'excessive view updates', 'layout thrash', 'SwiftUI', 'Instruments profiling', 'performance'. These are terms developers naturally use when describing SwiftUI performance issues. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | Highly distinctive niche: SwiftUI runtime performance specifically. The combination of SwiftUI + performance diagnostics + Instruments profiling creates a clear, narrow domain that is unlikely to conflict with general Swift coding skills or other platform-specific skills. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 12 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
70%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This is a well-structured performance audit skill with excellent workflow clarity and progressive disclosure. Its main weakness is the lack of concrete, executable code examples—the remediation guidance describes patterns conceptually but doesn't show before/after code. There's also some redundancy between the workflow summary and the detailed sections that could be tightened.
Suggestions
Add at least 2-3 concrete before/after SwiftUI code examples in the Remediate section (e.g., narrowing state scope, stabilizing ForEach identity) to improve actionability.
Eliminate the redundancy between the Workflow overview (steps 1-5) and the numbered sections below it—either make the workflow a brief pointer to the sections or merge them into a single sequence.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is mostly efficient but has some redundancy—steps 1-3 in the Workflow section are repeated in more detail in sections 1-3 below, and some guidance (e.g., listing symptom categories twice) could be tightened. However, it avoids explaining basic SwiftUI concepts Claude already knows. | 2 / 3 |
Actionability | The skill provides concrete checklists and specific SwiftUI patterns to look for (e.g., unstable identity in ForEach, GeometryReader layout thrash), but lacks executable code examples. The remediation section describes what to do at a conceptual level rather than providing copy-paste code snippets showing before/after fixes. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The workflow is clearly sequenced from intake through code review, profiling, diagnosis, remediation, and verification. It includes explicit validation (step 6: re-run capture and compare baseline metrics) and a feedback loop where code review can escalate to profiling when inconclusive. The distinction between code-level suspicion and trace-backed evidence is a good checkpoint. | 3 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | The skill is a well-structured overview that delegates detailed content to clearly signaled one-level-deep references (code-smells.md, profiling-intake.md, report-template.md, plus WWDC resources). Navigation is easy and the references section is comprehensive and well-organized. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Validation
100%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 11 / 11 Passed
Validation for skill structure
No warnings or errors.
- Repository
- Dimillian/Skills
- Commit
05ba982
- Reviewed
Table of Contents
Is this your skill?
If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.