CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

rust

Mental-model reset for Rust. Use when writing or reviewing Rust code to shift from "it compiles" to "thinks in Rust." Triggers on Rust code review, "is this idiomatic", borrow-checker errors, API design, domain modeling, ownership, lifetimes, errors, traits, async/Tokio, unsafe, serde, FFI, tests, performance, Cargo structure, .rs files, Cargo.toml, rustc diagnostics, clippy findings, Result/Option, thiserror vs anyhow, newtype, typestate, enum vs trait, dyn Trait, Send/Sync, Pin, Miri, PyO3, napi-rs, cxx, UniFFI, wasm-bindgen, serde attributes, or feature unification.

87

1.05x
Quality

80%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

99%

1.05x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No known issues

Optimize this skill with Tessl

npx tessl skill review --optimize ./rust/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security

Quality

Content

70%

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

This is a well-structured mental-model skill that excels at progressive disclosure and workflow clarity for Rust code review. Its main weaknesses are the significant content repetition across four parallel representations of the same principles (numbered list, common mistakes, checklist, quick reference table) and the complete absence of executable Rust code examples despite being a skill about writing Rust. The guidance is specific and domain-expert-level but would benefit from trimming redundancy and adding concrete before/after code snippets.

Suggestions

Consolidate the four parallel representations (numbered principles, Common Mistakes, Review Checklist, Quick Reference table) into fewer sections — e.g., merge the checklist into the numbered principles and keep only the quick reference table as a summary, which would significantly reduce token count.

Add at least 2-3 short before/after Rust code examples for the most common transformations (e.g., bare String → newtype, bool parameter → enum, Error(String) → typed error) to make the skill more actionable and executable.

DimensionReasoningScore

Conciseness

The content is well-organized and avoids explaining basic Rust syntax, but there is significant repetition across sections: the numbered principles, the 'Common Mistakes' list, the 'Review Checklist', and the 'Quick Reference' table all cover largely the same ground in different formats. This redundancy inflates token count substantially without proportional value.

2 / 3

Actionability

The skill provides highly specific guidance on what to do and what not to do, with concrete code smells and their fixes named precisely. However, it contains zero executable code examples — no before/after Rust snippets demonstrating the transformations. For a skill about writing Rust code, the absence of any actual Rust code is a notable gap in actionability.

2 / 3

Workflow Clarity

The Review Checklist provides a clear, sequenced workflow for reviewing Rust code, moving from domain modeling through ownership, error handling, async, unsafe, boundaries, and performance. For a mental-model/review skill (not a destructive or batch operation), this level of structure with explicit decision points is appropriate and well-ordered.

3 / 3

Progressive Disclosure

The skill is an excellent overview document with well-signaled, one-level-deep references to detailed topic files (ownership.md, error-handling.md, async.md, etc.) and granular reference files (references/newtypes-and-domain-types.md, etc.). Cross-references are clearly organized at the bottom. Navigation is easy and the structure is well-suited for progressive disclosure, though bundle files weren't provided to verify the references exist.

3 / 3

Total

10

/

12

Passed

Description

89%

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

This description excels at trigger term coverage and completeness, with an explicit 'Use when' clause and an extensive list of Rust-specific trigger terms that would reliably match user queries. Its main weakness is that the core capability ('mental-model reset') is abstract rather than describing concrete actions Claude will perform. Despite this, the sheer specificity of the trigger terms and the clear 'when' guidance make it highly functional for skill selection.

Suggestions

Replace the abstract 'mental-model reset' framing with concrete actions, e.g., 'Reviews Rust code for idiomatic patterns, fixes borrow-checker issues, designs APIs using ownership and type-level guarantees, refactors error handling.'

DimensionReasoningScore

Specificity

The description names the domain (Rust) and mentions a broad set of topics (ownership, lifetimes, async, FFI, etc.), but the core action is abstract—'mental-model reset' is vague and doesn't list concrete actions like 'refactor code to use idiomatic patterns' or 'fix borrow-checker errors'. It's more of a philosophy statement than a capability list.

2 / 3

Completeness

The description answers both 'what' (mental-model reset for Rust, shifting from 'it compiles' to 'thinks in Rust') and 'when' with an explicit 'Use when' clause and an extensive 'Triggers on' list. Both dimensions are clearly addressed.

3 / 3

Trigger Term Quality

Excellent coverage of natural trigger terms users would actually say: 'borrow-checker errors', 'is this idiomatic', 'Rust code review', '.rs files', 'Cargo.toml', 'clippy findings', 'Result/Option', 'thiserror vs anyhow', 'Send/Sync', and many more specific Rust ecosystem terms. This is comprehensive and well-targeted.

3 / 3

Distinctiveness Conflict Risk

Highly distinctive—it's specifically about idiomatic Rust thinking and includes very specific Rust ecosystem terms (PyO3, napi-rs, cxx, UniFFI, wasm-bindgen, Miri, typestate, etc.) that are unlikely to conflict with generic coding skills or other language-specific skills.

3 / 3

Total

11

/

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.

Validation11 / 11 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository
joshuadavidthomas/agent-skills
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.