m11-ecosystem
Use when integrating crates or ecosystem questions. Keywords: E0425, E0433, E0603, crate, cargo, dependency, feature flag, workspace, which crate to use, using external C libraries, creating Python extensions, PyO3, wasm, WebAssembly, bindgen, cbindgen, napi-rs, cannot find, private, crate recommendation, best crate for, Cargo.toml, features, crate 推荐, 依赖管理, 特性标志, 工作空间, Python 绑定
Install with Tessl CLI
npx tessl i github:actionbook/rust-skills --skill m11-ecosystem64
Does it follow best practices?
If you maintain this skill, you can automatically optimize it using the tessl CLI to improve its score:
npx tessl skill review --optimize ./path/to/skillValidation for skill structure
Discovery
37%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 description is essentially a keyword list masquerading as a skill description. While it excels at trigger term coverage with comprehensive keywords including error codes and multilingual terms, it completely fails to explain what the skill actually does. The absence of any concrete actions or capabilities makes it impossible for Claude to understand what this skill provides beyond 'something about Rust crates'.
Suggestions
Add concrete action verbs describing what the skill does, e.g., 'Recommends appropriate crates for specific use cases, resolves dependency conflicts, configures feature flags, and guides FFI integration with C/Python/WASM'
Restructure to lead with capabilities before the 'Use when' clause, following the pattern: '[What it does]. Use when [triggers].'
Reduce keyword density and integrate the most important terms naturally into capability descriptions rather than listing them separately
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Specificity | The description contains no concrete actions - it only lists keywords and trigger terms without explaining what the skill actually does. There are no verbs describing capabilities like 'integrates', 'recommends', or 'configures'. | 1 / 3 |
Completeness | The description has a 'Use when' clause but completely lacks the 'what does this do' component. It only specifies triggers without explaining what actions or capabilities the skill provides. | 1 / 3 |
Trigger Term Quality | Excellent coverage of natural keywords users would say: 'which crate to use', 'best crate for', 'crate recommendation', error codes (E0425, E0433), file names (Cargo.toml), and specific technologies (PyO3, wasm, bindgen). Also includes Chinese translations for international users. | 3 / 3 |
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk | The Rust/Cargo ecosystem focus with specific error codes and crate-related terms provides some distinctiveness, but 'ecosystem questions' is vague and could overlap with general Rust programming skills. The specific technologies (PyO3, wasm, bindgen) help differentiate it somewhat. | 2 / 3 |
Total | 7 / 12 Passed |
Implementation
72%Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
This skill excels at concise, well-organized reference material with excellent use of tables for quick lookup. However, it functions more as a reference guide than an actionable skill - it tells Claude what crates to consider but doesn't show how to integrate them with executable examples. Adding a few concrete code snippets for common integration patterns would significantly improve actionability.
Suggestions
Add executable code examples for common integration patterns (e.g., adding serde derives, setting up tokio runtime, configuring feature flags in Cargo.toml)
Include a step-by-step workflow for resolving dependency errors (E0433, E0603) with validation steps
Add a concrete example showing how to evaluate and add a new crate dependency from start to finish
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The content is lean and efficient, using tables extensively to convey information densely. No unnecessary explanations of concepts Claude would already know; every section provides actionable reference material. | 3 / 3 |
Actionability | Provides good reference tables and decision criteria, but lacks executable code examples. The guidance is concrete (specific crate names, error codes) but missing copy-paste ready code snippets for common integration patterns. | 2 / 3 |
Workflow Clarity | The 'Thinking Prompt' section provides a decision checklist, and trace up/down sections show navigation, but there's no explicit step-by-step workflow with validation checkpoints for actually integrating a crate or resolving dependency issues. | 2 / 3 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized with clear sections, appropriate use of tables, and explicit cross-references to related skills. The 'Related Skills' and 'Trace Up/Down' sections provide clear one-level-deep navigation to other resources. | 3 / 3 |
Total | 10 / 12 Passed |
Validation
75%Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.
Validation — 12 / 16 Passed
Validation for skill structure
| Criteria | Description | Result |
|---|---|---|
metadata_version | 'metadata' field is not a dictionary | Warning |
license_field | 'license' field is missing | Warning |
frontmatter_unknown_keys | Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata | Warning |
body_output_format | No obvious output/return/format terms detected; consider specifying expected outputs | Warning |
Total | 12 / 16 Passed | |
- 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.