run-tests

Use this skill when the user asks to "run tests", "test this", "check if tests pass", "cargo test", "run clippy", "lint this", "check formatting", "cargo fmt", "CI checks", "verify changes", "does this pass tests", "run the full check", "pre-commit check", or wants to verify that code changes are correct. Use this even when the user says something like "make sure this works" or "check for issues" in the context of code changes.

Quality

86%

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

Quality

Content

90%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.

An excellent, dense reference body that is fully executable and conciseness-exemplary, with a clear pre-PR verification workflow and a useful change-type decision guide. The only gap is the absence of an explicit validate→fix→retry loop framing in the failure sections.

Suggestions

Add a short explicit feedback loop in "Interpreting Failures" (e.g., "Fix the warning, then re-run `cargo clippy --locked -- -D warnings` until it passes before committing") to make the validate→fix→retry cycle explicit.

Consider pulling the per-failure-cause detail in "Interpreting Failures" into a short reference file if the body grows, keeping SKILL.md as the overview.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	Lean and well-organized with no padding: it never explains what tests are or how cargo works, and every section (table, CI one-liner, change-type decision list, failure interpretation) earns its place.	5 / 5
Actionability	Fully executable, copy-paste-ready commands with exact flags throughout (e.g., "cargo clippy --locked -- -D warnings", "cargo test --test dataprime input"), and the change-type → command mapping covers the common cases.	5 / 5
Workflow Clarity	Clear sequenced workflow with an explicit pre-commit/pre-PR checkpoint ("Run it before committing or creating a PR") and a change-type decision tree, but it lacks an explicit validate→fix→retry feedback-loop framing even though failure interpretation implicitly guides fixes.	4 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	Well-organized into clearly signaled sections and self-contained with no nested references, but at ~57 lines it sits just above the 50-line simple-skill heuristic, so it is not a clean 5.	4 / 5
	Total	18 / 20 Passed

Description

82%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 with comprehensive natural phrasings. Its main weakness is that the capability (the "what") is implied through trigger commands rather than stated as an explicit, concise capability sentence.

Suggestions

Lead with an explicit capability statement (e.g., "Runs cargo tests, clippy, and formatting checks to verify Rust code changes") before the trigger list, so the "what" is stated directly rather than inferred.

Consider narrowing or scoping the generic phrases ("verify changes", "make sure this works", "check for issues") to the code-change/cargo context to reduce overlap risk with broader review or debugging skills.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	Enumerates several concrete actions via quoted commands ("cargo test", "run clippy", "lint this", "check formatting", "cargo fmt", "cargo build") rather than vague language, though capabilities are framed as triggers rather than a crisp capability statement.	4 / 5
Completeness	The "when" is answered exceptionally and explicitly with concrete trigger phrases, and the "what" is present ("verify that code changes are correct") but implied through the listed commands rather than stated as an explicit capability.	4 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	Comprehensive coverage of natural phrases users actually say, including synonyms and tool-specific terms ("run tests", "test this", "cargo test", "run clippy", "CI checks", "verify changes", "make sure this works", "check for issues").	5 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Cargo/CI-specific triggers ("cargo test", "cargo clippy", "cargo fmt", "CI checks") carve a clear niche, but generic phrases like "verify changes" and "check for issues" carry minor overlap risk with other skills.	4 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Validation

81%

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 — 13 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

Criteria	Description	Result
metadata_version	'metadata.version' is missing	Warning
metadata_field	'metadata' should map string keys to string values	Warning
frontmatter_unknown_keys	Unknown frontmatter key(s) found; consider removing or moving to metadata	Warning

	Total	13 / 16 Passed

Repository: coralogix/cx-cli
Path: .claude/skills/run-tests/SKILL.md
Commit: 4aa811a

Reviewed: 2 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.