CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

flutter-dart-code-review

Library-agnostic Flutter/Dart code review checklist covering widget best practices, state management patterns (BLoC, Riverpod, Provider, GetX, MobX, Signals), Dart idioms, performance, accessibility, security, and clean architecture.

57

Quality

66%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./skills/flutter-dart-code-review/SKILL.md

The canonical home for this skill is tdg-personal/flutter-dart-code-review

SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

65%

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

A thorough, actionable review checklist with concrete guidance and a usable code example, but it functions as a monolithic inline document rather than an overview pointing to deeper references, and lacks a sequenced review workflow with validation checkpoints.

Suggestions

Add a short sequenced 'How to run this review' workflow with an explicit validation loop (e.g. 'Run `flutter analyze` → address findings → re-run until clean') to lift workflow clarity.

Move the detailed per-solution state-management section and quick-reference table into a reference file (e.g. `references/state-management.md`) and keep SKILL.md as a concise overview with one-level-deep links, improving progressive disclosure and conciseness.

De-duplicate repeated guidance (e.g. the `print()`/logging rule appears in sections 1, 2, and 15) to reduce length and token cost.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is mostly efficient — terse checklist items and one focused code sample — but at ~430 lines it is long for a SKILL.md and repeats concepts (e.g. `print()` vs `dart:developer log()` appears in sections 1, 2, and 15) that could be tightened or split into a reference file.

2 / 3

Actionability

Checklist items give concrete, executable guidance (e.g. 'enable `strict-casts`, `strict-inference`, `strict-raw-types`', '`MediaQuery.sizeOf(context)`', 'use `StringBuffer` instead of `+`') and the one code block is complete, copy-pasteable Dart, matching the score-3 anchor.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

It is organized as a flat checklist rather than a sequenced review process; there are no explicit validation checkpoints or a feedback loop (e.g. 'run flutter analyze → fix → re-run') for what is effectively a batch review operation, capping workflow clarity at 2 per the destructive/batch-operations guideline.

2 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

There is clear section structure, but all content is inline in SKILL.md with no bundle files and no references split out; the bulk of the checklist (e.g. the per-solution state-management detail and quick-reference table) would be better served as a one-level-deep reference, leaving it at the score-2 anchor.

2 / 3

Total

9

/

12

Passed

Description

67%

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 specific, well-scoped description that clearly conveys what the skill does and is unlikely to conflict with other skills. Its main gap is the missing explicit 'Use when...' trigger clause, which leaves the 'when to use' dimension only implied.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause such as 'Use when reviewing Flutter/Dart code, conducting PR reviews, or auditing a Flutter app for quality.' to satisfy the 'when' half of completeness.

Include more natural user phrasings (e.g. 'review my Flutter app', 'audit this Dart code', 'PR review') to broaden trigger-term coverage.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description enumerates concrete review domains — 'widget best practices, state management patterns (BLoC, Riverpod, Provider, GetX, MobX, Signals), Dart idioms, performance, accessibility, security, and clean architecture' — listing multiple specific actions, matching the score-3 anchor.

3 / 3

Completeness

It clearly answers 'what does this do' (a library-agnostic review checklist across named domains) but has no 'Use when...' clause or equivalent explicit trigger, which the guidelines say caps completeness at 2.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

It includes relevant terms a user might say ('Flutter/Dart code review', 'state management', 'performance', 'accessibility') but omits common phrasings like 'review my Flutter app', 'PR review', or 'lint my Dart code', so coverage is partial rather than comprehensive.

2 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

It carves a clear, narrow niche — Flutter/Dart code review across named state-management solutions — with triggers unlikely to fire for non-Flutter skills, matching the score-3 anchor for a distinct niche.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Validation

93%

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

Validation15 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

CriteriaDescriptionResult

metadata_version

'metadata.version' is missing

Warning

Total

15

/

16

Passed

Repository
affaan-m/ECC
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.