Skip to content
Back to skills

Review

ASecurity

Review Rust module boundaries and implicit coupling using cargo-coupling findings and source evidence.

  • 109 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 2 views
  • Added September 12, 2026
devopsrustgobash

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned September 23, 2026

npx -y skills add nwiizo/cargo-coupling --skill review --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Review?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Review
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/nwiizo-review/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/nwiizo-review)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: review
description: Review Rust module boundaries and implicit coupling using cargo-coupling findings and source evidence.
argument-hint: "[path]"
allowed-tools: Read, Grep, Glob, Bash
---

# Modularity Review

Review the requested scope (default `./src`) for changes that would force unrelated
modules to change together. Reuse a current report or obtain one:

```bash
rtk proxy cargo run -- coupling --ai ./src
```

Read the target's `.coupling.toml` and the source behind consequential findings.
Use [the balance model](../balanced-coupling/SKILL.md) for interpretation. Missing
subdomain configuration is uncertainty to explain, not a reason to block a review
or invent business classifications.

Focus semantic inspection on knowledge shared across boundaries: duplicated rules,
shared constants or ordering assumptions, and co-changing files without an AST
edge. Separate code evidence from assumptions about teams, deployments, or runtime
behavior that static analysis cannot establish. Check the analysis manifest before
calling a report clean.

Prioritize supported findings by change impact and essential volatility. Preserve
expected entrypoint fan-out, stable hubs, and re-export facades. Keep configuration
and history comparable; grade improvement alone is not evidence of better design.

Report findings with file locations, shared knowledge, likely impact, and a
specific recommendation. Include sound design choices and relevant blind spots;
omit empty sections. Use history or baseline analysis only when trend or PR context
matters. The review is complete when its findings and limits are supported;
implementation is a separate user-requested action.

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…

Newsletter

Get the weekly list of safe new skills, and the ones we pulled.