Token导航 LogoToken导航

Agent Skill · 研究检索

rust-review(Rust 审查)

用于辅助数据库表结构、查询语句、迁移脚本和数据维护任务。它适合让 Agent 分析 schema、编写 SQL、排查查询问题、整理索引或生成迁移建议。使用时需要明确数据库类型、连接环境和目标表,区分只读分析与写入变更;涉及删除、更新、迁移和批量导入时,应优先 dry-run、备份或事务保护,避免误操作。

rust-review 是研究检索类 Agent Skill,可用宿主为 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI,通过GitHub 仓库获取,权限为需要联网;许可证信息还不明确,第三方扫描有提醒项,按安装量在研究检索类的 73,675 个 Skill 里排第 69,087。

总安装 220周安装 9GitHub Stars 6,075下载 71核验 2026-05-01

安装说明

本站只整理中文说明,不托管安装包,也不代用户安装。
GitHub
许可证
unknown

安装方式

通过对话安装

复制提示词发给支持本地命令或 Skills 的 AI 助手,先确认命令和权限,再让它执行。

请帮我安装这个 Agent Skill:rust-review(Rust 审查)
来源仓库:https://github.com/redisearch/redisearch
仓库路径:skills/rust-review
安装命令:
npx skills add https://github.com/redisearch/redisearch --skill rust-review
安装前请先检查当前环境是否支持对应 CLI,并向我确认将要执行的命令、安装目录、联网范围和文件读写权限;确认后再执行。

命令行安装

复制命令到本机终端执行。该命令会通过 npx skills 从第三方来源获取 Skill;本站只展示命令,不托管安装包,也不自动执行。

skills.shnpx skills
npx skills add https://github.com/redisearch/redisearch --skill rust-review

这个 Skill 是做什么的

研究检索类 Skill 主要解决「找资料、核对事实、把来源整理清楚」的问题,通常会让助手先检索再总结。

用于 Rust 语言编写的 Redisearch 代码审查。适合安全检查、性能建议和最佳实践提醒。rust-review 属于研究检索类 Skill,可作为该场景下的辅助能力补充。通过 npx 命令从 GitHub 仓库安装使用。需确认权限范围和维护状态,注意可能触发命令执行。

建议结合原始 README 核验具体用法和功能边界。

来源仓库内路径:skills/rust-review

上手步骤

4 步
  1. 1

    确认自己的宿主工具

    公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI;先确认自己用的是其中之一,再按对应工具的 Skills 目录放置。

  2. 2

    拿到安装命令

    可以直接复制的命令是 npx skills add https://github.com/redisearch/redisearch --skill rust-review;命令里的占位符换成自己的路径或密钥再执行。

  3. 3

    安装后重启宿主

    命令执行完要完全退出宿主工具再打开,让新装的 Skill 被重新扫描到,否则列表里可能看不到。

  4. 4

    按最小权限试用

    它需要需要联网,先在测试目录或测试账号里跑,确认没问题再放到正式项目。

常见问题

6 条

rust-review 怎么安装?

在终端执行 npx skills add https://github.com/redisearch/redisearch --skill rust-review。装完完全退出宿主工具再打开,让它重新扫描本地 Skill。

rust-review 支持哪些 AI 工具?

公开资料标注支持 Codex、Claude、Cursor、Gemini CLI。其他工具只要能读取本地 Skill 目录,一般也能手动放进去,但要自己确认触发方式是否一致。

rust-review 需要什么权限?

权限级别是需要联网。该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

rust-review 是免费的吗?

公开资料没有标注明确许可证,收费和商用限制都无法确认。正式使用前请到来源仓库核对授权说明。

rust-review 用的人多吗?

公开数据是累计安装 220 次,近一周安装 9 次,下载 71 次,GitHub 6,075 星。这些数字来自第三方目录统计,只能当作热度参考,不代表质量或安全性。

rust-review 安全吗?

第三方扫描有提醒项,说明存在需要人工确认的行为。安装前请打开源码看清它读了什么、联网到哪里。

值得选的地方和要先想清楚的地方

值得选的地方

  • 同时适配 4 种工具,换客户端不用重新找替代品。
  • 来源仓库有 6,075 星,维护活跃度相对可查。

先想清楚的地方

  • 许可证没有明确标注,能不能商用、能不能再分发都不确定。
  • 第三方扫描存在提醒项或未通过项,需要人工逐条确认。
  • 第三方目录整理,版本更新和行为细节以来源仓库为准。

适不适合你

更适合

  • 已经在用 Codex,想直接扩展它能力的人。
  • 需要处理研究检索类任务、又不想每次都手写提示词的人。

不太适合

  • 需要明确授权才能用到公司项目里的场景。
  • 需要厂商级技术支持和 SLA 的生产系统。

研究检索类 Skill 对比

6 个同类
Skill总安装GitHub 星权限许可证扫描
find-skills

寻找技能 · Codex、Claude

31,199,81316,486操作浏览器MIT有提醒
self-improving-agent

自我改进 Agent · OpenClaw

16,464,0023,396接触敏感数据MIT-0通过
soultrace

灵魂追踪 · Codex、Claude

7,588,94412需要联网未明确有提醒
self-improving

自我完善 · OpenClaw

6,829,2841,046需要联网MIT-0通过
microsoft-foundry

微软代工厂 · Codex、Claude

6,614,144764调用外部服务未明确有提醒
rust-review

Rust 审查 · 本页

2206,075需要联网未明确有提醒

按安装量取同分类前几名;数字来自第三方目录统计,只作热度参考,不代表质量结论。

SKILL.md 原文

Rust Review

Review Rust code changes for unsafe correctness, documentation quality, and (when applicable) C-to-Rust porting fidelity.

Arguments

The input specifies what to review. Exactly one of the following forms:

Changesets:

  • <revset>: A jj revset (when .jj/ is present) — uses jj diff -r <revset>. Examples: slrzwyul, slrzwyul::vlrzmzvm, @-.
  • <commit> or <commit1>..<commit2>: Git commit(s) (when .jj/ is absent) — uses git diff / git show.
  • pr:<number>: GitHub pull request — fetches the PR branch and reviews locally.

Source files or directories:

  • <path>: Path to a Rust file or directory.
  • <path1> <path2>: Multiple files or directories.

If a path doesn't include src/, assume it to be in the src/redisearch_rs directory. E.g. trie_rs becomes src/redisearch_rs/trie_rs. If a path points to a directory, review all .rs files in that directory (recursively).

No argument: default to reviewing the uncommitted working-tree changes (jj diff if .jj/ is present, git diff otherwise).

Instructions

1. Collect the code to review

When reviewing a changeset (revset, commits, or PR), obtain the full diff of the Rust files (.rs):

# Jujutsu changes (when .jj/ is present)
jj diff -r <revset> --git -- glob:'**/*.rs'

# Git commits (when .jj/ is absent)
git diff <commit1>..<commit2> -- '*.rs'
# or for a single commit
git show <commit> -- '*.rs'

For a GitHub PR (pr:<number>), fetch the PR head ref and diff against master:

# When .jj/ is absent:
git fetch origin refs/pull/<number>/head
git diff origin/master...FETCH_HEAD -- '*.rs'

# When .jj/ is present:
git fetch origin refs/pull/<number>/head
jj git import
# Use the fetched SHA directly in the revset
jj diff -r 'master@origin..<sha>' --git -- glob:'**/*.rs'

Read the full source of every Rust file that was added or modified so that you have complete context (not just the diff hunks).

When reviewing source files or directories, there is no diff — read the full source of every .rs file at the given path(s) and review them in their entirety.

2. Determine if this is a C-to-Rust port

Scan the diff and commit messages for signals that the change re-implements existing C code:

  • New files under c_entrypoint/*_ffi/
  • Removal or reduction of C files with corresponding new Rust files
  • Commit messages mentioning "port", "migrate", "rewrite", "reimplement", or "replace"

If detected, set porting mode = true and identify the original C module(s) by reading them with /read-unmodified-c-module.

3. Review checklist

Run every check below on the changed Rust code. For each violation found, record:

  • File and line (or line range)
  • Rule that is violated
  • Explanation of the issue
  • Suggested fix
3a. Unsafe — method pre-conditions

Every unsafe fn must have a # Safety section in its doc comment that documents all pre-conditions the caller must uphold.

Violations:

  • unsafe fn with no doc comment at all.
  • unsafe fn with a doc comment but no # Safety section.
  • # Safety section that omits a pre-condition required for soundness (e.g. pointer validity, alignment, aliasing, lifetime, initialized memory).
3b. Unsafe — call-site safety comments

Every unsafe block (or unsafe call inside an unsafe fn) must have a // SAFETY: comment immediately preceding the unsafe block or call that explains why every pre-condition of the called function / accessed operation is satisfied at that call site.

Violations:

  • Missing // SAFETY: comment.
  • Comment that does not address every pre-condition listed in the callee's # Safety section (or the standard library's documented safety requirements).
  • Generic or vacuous comments (e.g. // SAFETY: safe to call) that do not reference the specific pre-conditions.
3c. Rustdoc — intra-doc links

When a rustdoc comment mentions a Rust symbol (type, function, constant, trait, module, etc.), it must use an intra-doc link ([Symbol] or [Symbol::method]).

Violations:

  • A symbol name appears in backticks (` Foo `) inside a doc comment but is not an intra-doc link.
  • A symbol name appears as plain text inside a doc comment without backticks or link.

Exceptions: symbols that are not Rust items (e.g. C function names, Redis command names, field names used in prose) do not need intra-doc links.

4. Porting-mode checks (only when porting mode = true)

4a. Semantic equivalence

Compare the new Rust implementation against the original C code and verify:

  • All branches / code paths in the C code have a corresponding path in Rust.
  • Edge cases (NULL checks, overflow, empty inputs, error returns) are preserved or replaced with idiomatic Rust equivalents (e.g. Option, Result).
  • Numeric types and casts preserve the original semantics (watch for sign / width changes).
  • Side effects (global state mutations, logging, metric updates) are preserved.

Violations: any semantic divergence that could change observable behavior.

4b. Test coverage

Identify all C/C++ tests that exercise the ported module (look under tests/ for files that reference the module's functions or types).

For each C/C++ test, verify that an equivalent Rust test exists that covers the same scenario. Use /check-rust-coverage to confirm line-level coverage of the new Rust code.

Violations:

  • A C/C++ test scenario that has no corresponding Rust test.
  • Rust code paths that are uncovered by any test.

5. Emit the report

Present findings grouped by check (3a, 3b, 3c, 4a, 4b). For each group, list the violations or state "No issues found."

At the end, provide a summary:

  • Total number of violations by severity (blocking vs. suggestion).
  • Whether the change is ready to merge or needs revision.

Blocking violations: any issue in 3a, 3b, 4a, or 4b. Suggestions: issues in 3c (intra-doc links).

平台分布

Codex

32.39%
按下载量换算23

Claude

30.79%
按下载量换算22

Cursor

19.68%
按下载量换算14

Gemini CLI

8.6%
按下载量换算6

安全审计

Gen Agent Trust Hub

通过

Socket

通过

Snyk

可疑

权限和风险

需要联网

该 Skill 可能需要联网访问来源站点、仓库或外部 API;具体网络访问范围需要结合源码和 README 复核。

安装前确认

本站仅展示第三方公开信息,不托管安装包,不提供自动安装或运行环境。安装前应自行审查源码、依赖和命令行为。来源安全扫描存在提醒或未通过项,安装前请自行复核。目前只有一个公开来源,建议同时核对源仓库。

继续浏览同类 Skills