Content
75%Weight 40%Scale 1-5Reviews the quality of instructions and guidance provided to agents. Good implementation is clear, handles edge cases, and produces reliable results.
The body is a tight, well-structured debugging overview that points to the right artifacts and routes to frb-fix-ci before deep work. It is concise and actionable, with the main gap being the absence of explicit validate/retry feedback loops for the diagnostic steps.
Suggestions
Turn the quick-diagnostics section into an explicit loop: inspect the dump -> form a hypothesis -> re-run with RUST_LOG=debug -> confirm the root cause before proceeding to internals.
Add a brief validation checkpoint after dumping IRs (e.g., what a correct vs. corrupted IR/spec looks like) so Claude can confirm findings before going deeper.
Specify what to do when the dump directory is empty or the codegen command fails to produce one, since that is a common failure mode for this skill.
| Dimension | Reasoning | Score |
|---|---|---|
Conciseness | The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence, giving concrete paths and commands without explaining FRB fundamentals; only the opening remote-testing note and the trailing '...' add minor slack. | 4 / 5 |
Actionability | Provides concrete, executable guidance such as `RUST_LOG=debug flutter_rust_bridge_codegen ...` and the `rust/target/frb_dump/` path, though the dump section lists what to inspect without showing how to act on findings. | 4 / 5 |
Workflow Clarity | There is a clear triage sequence (quick diagnostics -> docs -> route to frb-fix-ci first) with an explicit MUST-gate before deep debugging, but the diagnostic loop itself lacks explicit validate/fix/retry checkpoints. | 4 / 5 |
Progressive Disclosure | Well-organized single-level references to repo docs (`website/docs/...`) and related skills are clearly signaled with 'see:' and 'Related Skills', and the short body is appropriately split into sections with no nested references. | 4 / 5 |
Total | 16 / 20 Passed |