review · mag123c — Claude Code skill for Rust code review
This skill reviews Rust CLI/TUI changes with Rust, terminal UI, and clippy checks. It runs the code reviewer only; the UX reviewer stays inactive.
npx skills add mag123c/toktrack --skill review -a claude-codeWhat review does
The skill sends the diff to a Code Review Agent and supplies project architecture, conventions, and the Sprint Contract when available. It requires .claude/ai-context/architecture.md and .claude/ai-context/conventions.md. Because the project is a terminal TUI, the UX Review Agent is disabled.
Its checks cover unsafe, needless cloning and allocations, error handling, SIMD and rayon paths, ratatui widgets, theme colors, terminal resizing, and keyboard events. Before review, it runs cargo fmt --check and cargo clippy --all-targets --all-features -- -D warnings. Any clippy warning stops the review, so the project must pass clippy first.
The checklist also examines cache and data loss, compatibility, migrations, and differences between environments. A PASS leads straight to /wrap. On FAIL, the skill fixes issues, runs /verify, then reviews again, up to three attempts.
What it helps with
- review a Rust diff against project conventions
- catch ownership and error-handling issues
- check terminal resize and keyboard handling
- inspect migration and cache-loss risks
- stop review when clippy reports warnings
Example prompts for the agent
- Review this Rust diff with the
reviewskill and follow the project architecture. - Check the TUI changes for keyboard handling and terminal resizing.
- Review this data-format migration for compatibility with older files.
How to install review
1Skills CLI (Vercel)
npx skills add mag123c/toktrack --skill review -a claude-code2Manually: put the files in place
~/.claude/skills/review/SKILL.mdCopy the whole skill folder; for one project use .claude/skills/review/
1Skills CLI (Vercel)
npx skills add mag123c/toktrack --skill review -a codex2Manually: put the files in place
.agents/skills/review/SKILL.mdFor all projects use ~/.agents/skills/
1Skills CLI (Vercel)
npx skills add mag123c/toktrack --skill review -a cursor2Manually: put the files in place
.cursor/skills/review/SKILL.mdCursor also reads .agents/skills/ and .claude/skills/
1GitHub CLI
gh skill install mag123c/toktrack review2Manually: put the files in place
.github/skills/review/SKILL.md1Skills CLI (Vercel)
npx skills add mag123c/toktrack --skill review -a gemini-cli2Platform CLI
gemini skills install https://github.com/mag123c/toktrack --path .claude/skills/reviewManually: put the files in place
.devin/skills/review/SKILL.mdThe legacy .windsurf/skills/ path still works
Skills CLI (Vercel)
npx skills add mag123c/toktrack --skill review -a opencodeClaude.ai
Zip the folder and upload it in Settings → Capabilities → Skills
Step by step, with commands for each platform: How to install skills in Claude Code: five ways
Questions about review
How do I install review in Claude Code?
Run npx skills add mag123c/toktrack --skill review -a claude-code. The skill file is installed at ~/.claude/skills/review/SKILL.md.
What does the review skill do?
It asks a Code Review Agent to inspect Rust CLI/TUI changes against project rules and Rust and TUI checklists. Formatting and clippy run before the review.
What does review need to run?
The project needs .claude/ai-context/architecture.md and .claude/ai-context/conventions.md. Clippy warnings stop the review from starting.
Source text
SKILL.md · MIT
--- name: review description: | Multi-agent code review for Rust CLI/TUI. UX Review inactive (terminal UI — no web frontend). Code Review only. Includes Rust/clippy-specific checklist. required_context: - .claude/ai-context/architecture.md - .claude/ai-context/conventions.md --- # Review (toktrack override) Follows the global `/review` multi-agent pattern, with the following overrides: ## Override: UX Review Inactive This project is a terminal TUI app — **do not run the UX Review Agent.** Run Code Review Agent only. ## Override: Code Review Checklist Extension In addition to the global checklist, append the following to the Code Review Agent prompt: ### Critical (PLAN gate) | Category | Items | |----------|-------| | PLAN assumption refutation | Does the diff **falsify** the `[agent-inferred]`/`[unverified-gate]` assumptions from the PLAN (falsified → P1+, carry to wrap) | ### Author Review Gate (P0 — Identity / Matrix) This repo is OSS and the reviewer is the author (receiving PRs). Generic code health is covered by Rust/TUI/clippy below; this section examines product-specific risks that **only the author can validate**. Perspective SSOT: session memory `feedback_review_perspective.md`. | Tier | Category | Items | |------|----------|-------| | **reject** | Identity ① ultra-fast | Adding latency·blocking IO·synchronous network to hot path/startup → reject | | **reject** | Identity ② persistent cache / data preservation | Risk of cache·history loss or corruption → reject. backward-compat·graceful degradation are the means to uphold this | | **ruthless** | Irreversible | breaking change · data migration · public behavior change | | **ruthless** | Environment/state matrix (contributors test only their own machine) | OS(paths·home·file locks·Windows) / source schema version(forward new-schema+backward old-format, new source·parser PRs require old-version·unknown-schema fixture) / data shape(empty·large·corrupt·partial·permissions) / locale·TZ·DST / concurrency(read race while source file is being written) / terminal(width·color·TERM) / first-run vs upgrade migration | | **bias to YES** | Other features·ideas | Stars are the goal — acceptance bias. But if it taxes either core(weighing down hot path·startup·cache paths), request location·approach adjustment only. additive/opt-in/lazy/behind a flag = welcome | | **lenient** | Style·naming preferences | Linter takes precedence, bikeshed prohibited (uniform strictness = contributor friction → star loss) | | **signal** | Direction/growth fit (not a gate) | Beyond code quality·conventions, every contribution(issue·PR) also gets a direction-fit verdict in the review output: `strengthens wedge (persistent cache/data preservation)` / `neutral (additive)` / `dilutes focus (e.g. feature-parity chasing)` + 1–2 lines of rationale. Weigh holistically: maintenance cost vs value, real value to target users(AI CLI heavy users), contribution to project direction. Never a reject reason — the two identities above remain the only gates, bias-to-YES stands | ### Rust-specific | Category | Items | |----------|-------| | Safety | Minimize `unsafe` usage, comment with justification | | Ownership | Unnecessary `.clone()`, `to_string()`, `to_owned()` | | Error | `anyhow`/`thiserror` pattern consistency, no `unwrap()` (tests excluded) | | Performance | Unnecessary allocation, `Vec` vs iterator chain, `Box<dyn>` vs generic | | SIMD | Check fallback branch in simd-json parsing path | | Concurrency | Check shared mutable state in rayon parallel path | ### TUI-specific | Category | Items | |----------|-------| | Widget | ratatui `Widget` trait implementation consistency | | Theme | Use `theme.rs` semantic colors (no hardcoded colors) | | Layout | Handle terminal resize (`Rect` boundary check) | | Input | Missing keyboard event handling (shortcuts registered in help vs actual handlers) | ### Clippy/Fmt Pre-check Code Review Agent checks the following before review: ```bash cargo fmt --check cargo clippy --all-targets --all-features -- -D warnings ``` If there are clippy warnings, FAIL before starting review (should have been caught by verify). ## Execution 1. Collect context (diff, conventions, architecture, Sprint Contract) - PLAN provenance tags/gates (if present) — `[agent-inferred]` / `[unverified-gate]` 2. Launch **Code Review Agent only** (feature-dev:code-reviewer) - Global `agents/code-review.md` prompt + above author gates + Rust/TUI checklist append 3. Parse verdict → PASS → /wrap, FAIL → fix → /verify → re-review ## Rules - **Sub-agent model**: launch the Code Review Agent via the Agent tool with `model: "sonnet"` (Sonnet 5). - Do not run UX Review Agent (TUI project) - PASS → run /wrap immediately - FAIL → fix → /verify → re-review (max 3)
© mag123c · MIT · mag123c/toktrack
Similar skills
All skills for Code review and refactoring →review by other authors comes first.