m15-anti-pattern

Use when reviewing code for anti-patterns. Keywords: anti-pattern, common mistake, pitfall, code smell, bad practice, code review, is this an anti-pattern, better way to do this, common mistake to avoid, why is this bad, idiomatic way, beginner mistake, fighting borrow checker, clone everywhere, unwrap in production, should I refactor, 反模式, 常见错误, 代码异味, 最佳实践, 地道写法

Quality

78%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/m15-anti-pattern/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

67%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.

A well-structured, dense reference catalog of Rust anti-patterns with concrete fixes, specific error codes, and a clear review heuristic plus checklist. Its main weakness is redundancy — the same handful of lessons recur across multiple tables — and the absence of before/after code examples for the suggested refactors.

Suggestions

Consolidate the recurring clone/unwrap/String entries: keep one authoritative Anti-Pattern table and have the Code Smell, Common Error, and Top 5 tables cross-reference it rather than re-listing the same fixes.

Add 1-2 short before/after Rust snippets for the highest-frequency refactors (clone→reference, unwrap→?) to lift actionability from concrete mappings to copy-paste-ready guidance.

Move the 'Related Skills' cross-links to the top as a one-line navigation pointer so the trace-up/trace-down relationships are visible before the reader scans the tables.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Dense reference tables with no over-explanation of concepts Claude already knows, but the same core lessons (clone, unwrap, String) recur across roughly six tables (Anti-Pattern, Top 5 Beginner Mistakes, Code Smell, Common Error Patterns, Quick Review Checklist, Thinking Prompt) and could be tightened. Not 4 because the redundancy is more than minor; not 2 because there is no padding or concept fluff.	3 / 5
Actionability	Concrete pattern→fix mappings and specifics like 'E0382 use after move' and 'lazy_static! → std::sync::OnceLock' give actionable guidance for a reviewer. Held below 5 because some fixes stay abstract ('Proper ownership', 'Restructure') and there are no before/after code blocks illustrating the refactor.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	A clear 3-step review sequence in 'Thinking Prompt' (symptom-or-cause → idiomatic alternative → does it fight Rust) plus a 'Quick Review Checklist' structure the review. No validation checkpoints are present, but none are required for a non-destructive review skill; not 5 because the body reads more as a reference catalog than a tightly sequenced workflow.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Well-organized into clearly headed sections (Anti-Pattern → Better Pattern, Trace Up, Trace Down, Top 5, Code Smell, Common Error, Deprecated → Better, Quick Review Checklist, Related Skills) with easy navigation and no nested references. A single-file structure is appropriate for this reference catalog; not 5 because all content is inline with no progressive split, though none is strictly needed.	4 / 5
	Total	15 / 20 Passed

Description

77%Weight 40%Scale 1-5

Based on the skill's description, can an agent find and select it at the right time? Clear, specific descriptions lead to better discovery.

A strong, trigger-rich description that clearly signals when to use the skill, anchored in concrete Rust-specific phrases. Its main weakness is capability specificity — it states one action and otherwise relies on a keyword list rather than describing what the skill concretely does.

Suggestions

Add one sentence stating the skill's concrete outputs, e.g. 'Identifies common Rust anti-patterns, explains why each is problematic, and suggests idiomatic alternatives.'

Trim the longest keyword chains slightly; the core value is the Rust-specific triggers, so the generic ones (code review, bad practice) could be condensed to reduce overlap with general code-review skills.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Names the domain as a single concrete action ('reviewing code for anti-patterns') but does not enumerate the capabilities the skill actually performs (e.g. identify, explain, or suggest refactors); the description is largely a keyword inventory rather than a list of specific actions. Not 2 because the domain and core action are concrete; not 4-5 because no multiple specific capabilities are listed.	3 / 5
Completeness	Both 'what' ('reviewing code for anti-patterns') and 'when' ('Use when reviewing code...' followed by explicit trigger keywords) are present and explicit. Held below 5 because the 'what' is a single minimal action rather than a comprehensive statement of what the skill does.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Extensive natural keywords and phrases a user would actually say — 'is this an anti-pattern', 'should I refactor', 'why is this bad', 'clone everywhere', 'unwrap in production', 'fighting borrow checker' — plus synonyms ('pitfall', 'code smell', 'bad practice') and Chinese translations, giving comprehensive coverage.	5 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Clear niche (anti-pattern review) with distinct Rust-flavored triggers ('fighting borrow checker', 'clone everywhere', 'unwrap in production') that minimize conflict risk; minor overlap risk remains with general 'code review' skills because of that generic keyword.	4 / 5
	Total	16 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

Warnings & errors only

Checks the skill against the spec for correct structure and formatting. All validation checks must pass before discovery and implementation can be scored.

Validation — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: actionbook/rust-skills
Path: skills/m15-anti-pattern/SKILL.md
Commit: 5c40d3a

Reviewed: 14 days ago

Table of Contents

Discovery Implementation Validation

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.