Skip to content
Data
Skill

/review

Multi-agent code review for Rust CLI/TUI. UX Review inactive (terminal UI — no web frontend). Code Review only. Includes Rust/clippy-specific checklist.

From plugin
toktrack
1826 skills
Install
$ npx -y skills add mag123c/toktrack --skill review --agent claude-code

How it fires

How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.

  • Fires itselfAuto-invocation. Claude auto-loads it when your prompt matches the work.Auto-invocation is when the right skill fires by itself at the right moment, driven by a FLOW.md router and a hook, instead of you invoking it by name. It is the difference between a skill being installed and a skill actually getting used.Read the full definition →
  • You can call itInvoke it directly when you want it.
  • Slash command/review

Context preview

The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.

Multi-agent code review for Rust CLI/TUI. UX Review inactive (terminal UI — no web frontend). Code Review only. Includes Rust/clippy-specific checklist.

SKILL.md

review.SKILL.md
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:

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)
Read more
Ships withtoktrack

Ultra-fast token & cost tracker for LLM Token Usage (e.g. Claude Code)

Get the whole plugin
Stats
182
Stars
19
Forks
Active
Maintenance
Rust
Language
MIT
License
4d ago
Last commit
6mo ago
Created

Repo: mag123c/toktrack