CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

frb-develop-feature

Use when fixing bugs, adding regression tests, adding new features, when compilation is slow, or when learning twin test naming conventions in flutter_rust_bridge

61

Quality

71%

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 ./.claude/skills/frb-develop-feature/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

77%

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

A highly actionable, well-sequenced workflow skill with concrete commands, file paths, and strong validation/feedback loops, held back only by repetition of the core migration message and the absence of any progressive disclosure into reference files for a body of this length.

Suggestions

De-duplicate the 'dart_minimal → pure_dart' migration guidance: state it once in the Overview and reference it from the Final Placement Gate, Phase 1, Phase 2, and Common Mistakes instead of restating it in each.

Move the stable reference material (Quick Reference command table, Architecture directory table, Common Mistakes) into a reference file under references/ and point to it from a concise overview, so the SKILL.md body stays a lean entry point.

Consolidate the two repeated 'After codegen: Check your remote-testing rules' callouts into a single noted step referenced where needed.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The body is domain-specific and does not explain basics Claude already knows, but the 'iterate in dart_minimal then migrate to pure_dart' message and the remote-testing notes are repeated across the Overview, table, prose, Final Placement Gate, Phase 1, Phase 2, and Common Mistakes sections, so it could be tightened.

2 / 3

Actionability

It provides fully executable commands (e.g., "./frb_internal test-dart-native --package frb_example/pure_dart", "./frb_internal precommit-generate"), exact file paths, and a TwinNormal suffix table with concrete examples — copy-paste ready.

3 / 3

Workflow Clarity

A dot-graph workflow plus numbered Phase 1/Phase 2 steps and a Final Placement Gate checklist give a clear sequence with explicit validation checkpoints and feedback loops ('If any of these checks fail, return to Phase 2'; 'Pass? -> no -> Fix').

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

There are no bundle reference files (references/, scripts/, assets/ are absent), and the ~200-line body keeps all detailed material — command tables, architecture, common mistakes, the dot graph — inline rather than split into one-level-deep references, so structure exists but content that should be separate is inline.

2 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Description

65%

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 trigger-forward description that does a good job naming when to use the skill and natural user terms, but it leans on 'Use when' clauses without an explicit capability statement, leaving the 'what' implicit and creating some overlap risk with related frb skills.

Suggestions

Lead with an explicit capability statement of what the skill does (e.g., 'Develops bug fixes and features in flutter_rust_bridge via a dart_minimal → pure_dart iteration workflow') before the 'Use when' triggers, so 'what' is stated and not just inferred.

Tighten the generic 'fixing bugs, adding new features' triggers with the frb-specific qualifier (e.g., 'flutter_rust_bridge bug fixes / feature additions') to reduce overlap with sibling skills like frb-debugging and frb-test.

Clarify the niche term in plain language — 'twin test naming conventions' is jargon; pair it with a plainer phrasing a user would actually say.

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names concrete activities ("fixing bugs, adding regression tests, adding new features", "learning twin test naming conventions") tied to a specific domain, but these serve as trigger conditions rather than a distinct statement of the skill's capabilities, so it is not comprehensive on the 'what'.

2 / 3

Completeness

It has an explicit "Use when ..." clause that clearly answers 'when', but the 'what does this skill do' is only implied through the trigger activities rather than stated as an explicit capability, so one half is inferred.

2 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

It covers natural terms a user would say — "fixing bugs", "adding new features", "compilation is slow", "regression tests" — plus the domain keyword "flutter_rust_bridge", giving good coverage of likely phrasings.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

The "flutter_rust_bridge" qualifier and "twin test naming conventions" carve a niche, but the generic "fixing bugs" / "adding new features" triggers could overlap with sibling skills like frb-debugging, frb-test, and frb-prepare-pr.

2 / 3

Total

9

/

12

Passed

Validation

100%

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

Validation16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
fzyzcjy/flutter_rust_bridge
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.