rust

Use this guide when working on Rust changes in the FAST monorepo.

Quality

43%

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

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.github/skills/rust/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

47%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.

The content is concise and well-structured for a short skill, but the guidance is high-level and lacks concrete, executable steps or validation checkpoints for what are effectively breaking-change operations. Actionability and workflow clarity are the main weaknesses.

Suggestions

Add concrete, executable steps for the breaking-changes workflow, e.g. the exact command or file to check the crate/package version and how to flag a prerelease

Include a validation checkpoint, such as confirming the version bump and changelog/PR description reflect the breaking change before opening the PR

Specify where Rust logic should live (crate path/name) and how to wire it via wasm-bindgen rather than leaving it as a general principle

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is lean and assumes Claude's competence without explaining basic concepts, though phrases like "as much as possible any logic that exists in Rust should not be duplicated" could be trimmed, fitting the score-4 anchor "Efficient; minor instances of over-explanation that could be trimmed" rather than the fully lean score-5 anchor.	4 / 5
Actionability	Guidance like "check the crate and package version" and "update the APIs with breaking changes as necessary" is high-level without specifying where or how to check, fitting the score-2 anchor "Minimal concrete guidance; high-level hints but missing the specific steps to execute" rather than the more concrete score-3 anchor.	2 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The breaking-changes section implies a rough sequence (check version, update APIs if prerelease, capture in PR description) but steps are poorly defined with no validation checkpoints, matching the score-2 anchor "Rough sequence present but many gaps; steps poorly defined; validation absent"; making breaking API changes warrants validation that is absent here.	2 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	The skill is under 50 lines with two clear sections and no need for external bundle files, so it qualifies for a high score on well-organized structure; it sits at score-4 because sectioning is minimal rather than the ideal score-5 organization, and the only external pointer is the semver link.	4 / 5
	Total	12 / 20 Passed

Description

40%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.

The description has a clear trigger clause and a distinct niche, but it lacks any concrete statement of what the skill actually does, leaving the "what" vague. Specificity and completeness are the weak points.

Suggestions

Add a concrete "what" clause naming the actual actions, e.g. "Guides where Rust logic should live, how to wrap it via wasm-bindgen for NodeJS, and how to handle semver breaking changes"

Include natural trigger synonyms users might say beyond "Rust changes", such as "crate", "wasm-bindgen", or "Rust CLI"

Tighten "Use this guide" to a more direct third-person statement of capability to avoid the second-person trigger phrasing

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	The phrase "working on Rust changes in the FAST monorepo" names the domain (Rust, FAST monorepo) but the action is minimal and generic, matching the score-2 anchor "Names the domain but actions are minimal or generic" rather than the score-3 anchor which requires concrete actions.	2 / 5
Completeness	It provides a clear "when" ("Use this guide when working on Rust changes in the FAST monorepo") but the "what" is only a vague "this guide" with no concrete capabilities stated, matching the score-2 anchor where only the "when" is present without a real "what".	2 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	"Rust changes" and "FAST monorepo" are relevant keywords a user in this repo would naturally say, but common variations or synonyms are missing, fitting the score-3 anchor "Some relevant keywords but missing common variations or synonyms".	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	Tying the skill to Rust changes specifically within the FAST monorepo gives it a clear niche with minimal conflict risk, though "Rust changes" could still overlap with a general Rust skill, fitting the score-4 anchor "Mostly distinct; minor overlap risk with closely related skills" rather than the fully distinct score-5 anchor.	4 / 5
	Total	11 / 20 Passed

Validation

100%

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 — 16 / 16 Passed

Validation for skill structure

No warnings or errors.

Repository: microsoft/fast
Path: .github/skills/rust/SKILL.md
Commit: a909e87

Reviewed: about 15 hours 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.