fix-clippy

Fix all clippy lint warnings in the project

1.34x

Quality

66%

Does it follow best practices?

Impact

93%

1.34x

Average score across 3 eval scenarios

Securityby

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./.claude/skills/fix-clippy/SKILL.md

Quality

Content

80%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 lean, executable, and well-structured for a simple single-purpose skill, with copy-paste-ready commands and a useful cautionary note. Its main weakness is the lack of a verification loop after the batch manual-fix step.

Suggestions

Add a final verification step, e.g. re-run `cargo clippy --tests 2>&1 | grep '^warning:' | sort -u` and only finish when it returns no warnings, creating a validate-fix-retry loop.

Tighten the manual-fix guidance by pointing to `cargo clippy --tests 2>&1 | grep -A5 '^warning:'` or showing how to locate the file:line of each remaining warning.

Optionally note that `make fix` itself may run clippy, so the two steps are clearly ordered and non-redundant.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Conciseness	The body is ~25 lines with no padding or over-explanation of concepts Claude already knows, and the cautionary note about grepping for "error" is a high-value token that earns its place, matching the lean-and-efficient anchor.	5 / 5
Actionability	It provides two concrete executable commands ("make fix" and "cargo clippy --tests 2>&1 \| grep '^warning:' \| sort -u"), but the closing instruction to "find the exact location and fix it manually" leaves a minor gap in executable guidance, fitting the mostly-executable anchor.	4 / 5
Workflow Clarity	The two-step sequence is clear, but Step 2 is a batch fix operation with no validation checkpoint confirming the warnings are gone (e.g. re-running clippy to verify zero warnings); per the rubric, batch operations missing feedback loops cap workflow clarity at 3.	3 / 5
Progressive Disclosure	This is a simple, single-purpose skill under 50 lines with well-organized sections and no need for external references, so the simple-skills exception permits a 5; there are no nested or buried references to penalize.	5 / 5
	Total	17 / 20 Passed

Description

53%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 is concise and clearly states a single concrete action, but it omits any "Use when..." trigger guidance and lacks keyword synonyms, leaving it at a solidly average level rather than exemplary. It is distinct enough for its niche but would benefit from explicit trigger phrasing.

Suggestions

Add an explicit trigger clause, e.g. "Use when the user asks to fix clippy warnings, clean up Rust lints, or mentions cargo clippy."

Include natural synonyms/extensions such as "linting", "cargo clippy", and "Rust lints" to improve trigger term coverage.

Optionally list a second concrete action (e.g. "apply automated fixes and resolve remaining warnings") to broaden the specificity beyond a single action.

Dimension	Reasoning	Score
Specificity	"Fix all clippy lint warnings" names the domain (clippy lint warnings) and one concrete action (fix), matching the anchor for 1-2 concrete actions without being comprehensive; it does not reach 4 because only a single action is described.	3 / 5
Completeness	It clearly states what the skill does (fix clippy lint warnings) but provides no "Use when..." trigger clause; per the rubric guideline a missing trigger clause caps completeness at 3, so it does not reach 4.	3 / 5
Trigger Term Quality	The phrase "clippy lint warnings" includes a relevant technical term but lacks natural synonyms users might say (e.g. "linting", "cargo clippy", "rust lints"), fitting the anchor where some relevant keywords are present but common variations are missing.	3 / 5
Distinctiveness Conflict Risk	The description is tied to a specific tool (clippy) and task (lint warnings), giving it a clear niche with only minor overlap risk against other Rust/linting skills; it is not a 5 because it lacks the explicit trigger phrases that fully separate it.	4 / 5
	Total	13 / 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: quickwit-oss/quickwit
Path: .claude/skills/fix-clippy/SKILL.md
Commit: b419081

Reviewed: about 23 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.