smithery/cbgbt

review-style

Verify code follows project style guides without providing improvement suggestions

Installation

$ npx skills add smithery/cbgbt --skill review-style

Similar popular skills

Related neighbors and high-traction skills in the same topics — useful to compare before installing.

Also in this package

Other skills from smithery/cbgbt.

npx skills add smithery/cbgbt

Browse all from smithery/cbgbt

More details

Agent compatibility

Declared targets from SKILL.md / docs. Unmarked agents are not listed — the skill may still install via the CLI.

Claude Code Not declared
Cursor Not declared
Codex Not declared
GitHub Copilot Not declared
Windsurf Not declared
Gemini CLI Not declared
Cline Not declared
OpenCode Not declared

Package contents

Files included with this skill beyond the listing page.

  • skill md SKILL.md 3,625 B
  • docs SUMMARY.md 102 B

History

  1. First recorded snapshot · 0 installs

SKILL.md

Review Style Skill

Purpose

Verify that code follows all project style guides. This is a pass/fail gate, not a feedback session.

When to Use

  • TDD verification phase
  • PR review for style compliance
  • Any code review requiring style validation

Inputs Required

context_files

  • Style guide for the phase being reviewed (e.g., docs/style/rust-design.md)
  • Changed files to review
  • Ledger file (optional) for multi-cycle reviews

context_data

  • phase: Which phase (designer/tester/implementor) - determines which style guide rules apply
  • changed_files: List of files to review

Response Format

Return a structured response matching this schema:

class StyleResult(BaseModel):
    status: Literal["accept", "violations"]
    violations: list[str] = []  # Each: "file:line - description"
    themes: str | None = None   # Optional pattern across violations

If all checks pass:

StyleResult(status="accept")

If any check fails:

StyleResult(
    status="violations",
    violations=[
        "src/config.rs:23 - snafu selectors imported at module level; should be inside function",
        "src/parser.rs:45 - missing Given/When/Then comments in test",
    ],
    themes="Several violations stem from inconsistent error handling approach"
)

Ledger Awareness

When a ledger file is provided in context_files:

  1. Read previous cycles - Check what violations were raised and how implementor responded
  2. Verify RESOLVED items - Confirm fixes were actually applied
  3. Respect DISPUTED items - Do NOT re-raise if implementor's reason is valid
  4. Only raise NEW violations - Issues not previously discussed

Style Guides (Authoritative Sources)

The style guides in docs/style/ are the ONLY source of truth:

  • docs/style/rust-design.md - Design phase rules (types, signatures, bon, nutype, snafu)
  • docs/style/rust-impl.md - Implementation phase rules (error handling, imports, no panics)
  • docs/style/rust-test.md - Test phase rules (Given/When/Then, test_case, assertions)

Read the applicable guide and apply your judgment. Do not rely on summaries.

Procedure

1. Identify Applicable Rules

Based on the phase:

  • designer: rust-design.md rules (especially Project Crate Choices table)
  • tester: rust-test.md rules
  • implementor: rust-impl.md rules
  • Test files (#[cfg(test)] modules) always get rust-test.md rules regardless of phase

2. Review Each File

Check against applicable style guide rules. Only flag clear violations, not style preferences.

Critical checks for designer phase:

  • Composite structs (2+ fields) use #[derive(Builder)] with #[non_exhaustive]
  • Validated newtypes use nutype
  • Errors use snafu with #[snafu(module)]
  • Function bodies are todo!() not implementations

Critical checks for implementor phase:

  • No unwrap()/expect() in production code
  • Snafu context selectors imported inside functions
  • No blank lines between imports

Critical checks for tester phase:

  • Given/When/Then comments in every test
  • test_case for parameterized tests

3. Return Structured Result

Use the StyleResult schema. The orchestrator parses this to decide next steps.

What This Skill Does NOT Do

  • Suggest improvements unrelated to violations
  • Provide general constructive feedback
  • Review scope/correctness (use review-scope for that)
  • Flag style preferences not in guides

This is a binary gate: accept or violations.