本文へ移動
cccskills
無料GitHub で公開

macros-code-review

Reviews Rust macro code for hygiene issues, fragment misuse, compile-time impact, and procedural macro patterns. Use when reviewing macro_rules! definitions, procedural macros, derive macros, or attribute macros.

インストール方法を見る

含まれるファイル(3)

  • SKILL.md9.0 KB
  • references/declarative-macros.md12.2 KB
  • references/procedural-macros.md12.4 KB

SKILL.md(原文)

インストールする前に、エージェントに与えられる指示の中身を確認できます。

Macros Code Review

Review Workflow

  1. Check Cargo.toml -- Note Rust edition (2024 reserves gen keyword, affecting macro output), proc-macro crate dependencies (syn, quote, proc-macro2), and feature flags (e.g., syn with minimal features)
  2. Check macro type -- Determine if reviewing declarative (macro_rules!), function-like proc macro, attribute macro, or derive macro
  3. Check if a macro is needed -- If the transformation is type-based, generics are better. Macros are for structural/repetitive code generation that generics cannot express
  4. Scan macro definitions -- Read full macro bodies including all match arms, not just the invocation site
  5. Check each category -- Work through the checklist below, loading references as needed
  6. Gates -- Complete Gates below before reporting; do not substitute informal “I verified.”

Gates (before reporting findings)

Complete in order. Do not emit findings until Gate 4 passes for each issue.

Gate 1 — Crate context (on disk)
PASS when: You opened the reviewed crate’s Cargo.toml (workspace member path if applicable) and recorded Rust edition, whether the crate is proc-macro = true, and relevant proc-macro dependencies or syn / quote feature flags.
Blocks rationalization: Edition 2024 findings (gen, unsafe extern, generated unsafe bodies) and syn “full” vs minimal flags require this — do not flag edition-specific macro output without matching edition from the file.

Gate 2 — Macro definitions read
PASS when: For every macro you critique, you read the full definition (all macro_rules! arms, or the proc-macro entry plus helpers you rely on), not only call sites or partial expansions.
Artifact: At least one path per macro to the defining .rs file(s) you used.

Gate 3 — Per-finding evidence
PASS when: Each planned issue has [FILE:LINE] from the current tree for the macro definition, attribute/derive site, or generated code location you are discussing (not from memory, docs-only, or another branch).

Gate 4 — Pre-report protocol
PASS when: You loaded and applied the review-verification-protocol skill, including Macro-Specific Verification for hygiene, fragment type, and proc-macro performance claims. Then add findings.

Output Format

Report findings as:

[FILE:LINE] ISSUE_TITLE
Severity: Critical | Major | Minor | Informational
Description of the issue and why it matters.

Quick Reference

Issue TypeReference
Fragment types, repetition, hygiene boundaries (vars vs types), $crate paths, TT-muncher pattern + recursion limits, fragment-matcher follow restrictions, decl-vs-proc decision treereferences/declarative-macros.md
Proc macro types, syn/quote, span hygiene (call_site vs def_site vs mixed_site), syn::Error::new_spanned + combine, parse_quote! vs quote!, syn feature audit, trybuild UI testsreferences/procedural-macros.md

Review Checklist

Declarative Macros (macro_rules!)

  • Correct fragment types used (:expr vs :tt vs :ident -- wrong choice causes unexpected parsing)
  • Repetition separators match intended syntax (, vs ; vs none, * vs +)
  • Trailing comma/semicolon handled (add $(,)? or $(;)? at end of repetition)
  • Matchers ordered from most specific to least specific (first match wins)
  • No ambiguous expansions -- each metavariable appears in the correct repetition depth in the transcriber
  • Variables defined in the macro use macro-internal names (hygiene protects variables, not types/modules/functions)
  • Exported macros (#[macro_export]) use $crate:: for crate-internal paths, never crate:: or self::
  • Standard library paths use ::core:: and ::alloc:: (not ::std::) for no_std compatibility
  • compile_error! used for meaningful error messages on invalid input patterns
  • Macro placement respects textual scoping (defined before use) unless #[macro_export]

Procedural Macros

  • syn features minimized (don't enable full when derive suffices -- reduces compile time)
  • Spans propagated from input tokens to output tokens (errors point to user code, not macro internals)
  • Span::mixed_site() is the default for introduced helper variables — call_site only when intentionally pointing at user code; def_site is nightly-only on proc_macro::Span
  • Error reporting uses syn::Error::new_spanned(node, msg) with the offending AST node, never panic!
  • Multiple errors collected and reported together via syn::Error::combine (good UX vs first-failure)
  • parse_quote! (not quote!) used when the result needs to be a syn::T for further AST manipulation; syn::parse2(quote!{...}) for fallible cases
  • Public types re-exported from proc_macro2, not proc_macro (compatibility with downstream consumers)
  • proc-macro2 used for testing (testable outside of compiler context)
  • Generated code volume is proportionate -- proc macros that emit large amounts of code bloat compile times

Derive Macros

  • Derivation is obvious -- a developer could guess what it does from the trait name alone
  • Helper attributes (#[serde(skip)] style) are documented
  • Trait implementation is correct for all variant shapes (unit, tuple, struct variants)
  • Generated impl blocks use fully qualified paths (::core::, $crate::)

Attribute Macros

  • Input item is preserved or intentionally transformed (not accidentally dropped)
  • Attribute arguments are validated with clear error messages
  • Test generation patterns (#[test_case] style) produce unique test names
  • Framework annotations document what code they generate

Edition 2024 Awareness

  • Macro output does not use gen as an identifier (reserved keyword -- use r#gen or rename)
  • Generated unsafe fn bodies use explicit unsafe {} blocks around unsafe ops
  • Generated extern blocks use unsafe extern

Generics vs Macros

Flag a macro when the same result is achievable with generics or trait bounds. Macros are appropriate when:

  • The generated code varies structurally (not just by type)
  • Repetitive trait impls for many concrete types
  • Test batteries with configuration variants
  • Compile-time computation that const fn cannot express

Severity Calibration

Critical (Block Merge)

  • Macro generates unsound unsafe code
  • Hygiene violation in macro that outputs unsafe blocks (caller's variables leak into unsafe context)
  • Proc macro panics instead of returning compile_error! (crashes the compiler)
  • Derive macro generates incorrect trait implementation (violates trait contract)

Major (Should Fix)

  • Exported macro uses crate:: or self:: instead of $crate:: (breaks for downstream users)
  • Exported macro uses ::std:: instead of ::core::/::alloc:: (breaks no_std users)
  • Wrong fragment type causing unexpected parsing (:expr where :tt needed, or vice versa)
  • Proc macro enables syn full features unnecessarily (compile time cost)
  • Missing span propagation (errors point to macro definition, not invocation)
  • No error handling in proc macro (panics on bad input instead of compile_error!)

Minor (Consider Fixing)

  • Missing trailing comma/semicolon tolerance in repetition patterns
  • Matcher arms not ordered most-specific-first
  • Macro used where generics would be clearer and equally expressive
  • Missing compile_error! fallback arm for invalid patterns
  • Helper attributes undocumented

Informational (Note Only)

  • Suggestions to split complex macro_rules! into a proc macro
  • Suggestions to reduce generated code volume
  • TT munching or push-down accumulation patterns that could be simplified

Valid Patterns (Do NOT Flag)

  • macro_rules! for test batteries -- Generating repetitive test modules from a list of types/configs
  • macro_rules! for trait impls -- Implementing a trait for many concrete types with identical bodies
  • TT munching -- Valid advanced pattern for recursive token processing
  • Push-down accumulation -- Valid pattern for building output incrementally across recursive calls
  • #[macro_export] with $crate -- Correct way to make macros usable outside the defining crate
  • Span::call_site() for generated functions -- Intentionally making generated items visible to callers
  • syn::Error::to_compile_error() -- Correct error reporting pattern in proc macros
  • trybuild tests for proc macros -- Standard compile-fail testing approach
  • Attribute macros on test functions -- Common pattern for test setup/teardown
  • compile_error! in impossible match arms -- Good practice for catching invalid macro input

レビュー

まだレビューはありません。使ってみた感想をお寄せください。

同じリポジトリのスキル

概要と使いどころ

Use when you need to mine a conversation, session transcript, or design discussion for architectural decisions before writing ADRs. Identifies problem-solution pairs, trade-off debates, technology choices, and explicit "[ADR]" tags. Triggers on "what decisions did we make", "extract decisions from this chat", "find the choices in our discussion", or "summarize architectural decisions". Also useful after long planning sessions to capture decisions that were made implicitly. Does NOT write ADR documents — use adr-writing or write-adr for that.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

existential-birds/beagle822026年9月16日 更新

Use when writing or formatting an ADR document using the MADR template, applying Definition of Done (E.C.A.D.R.) criteria, or verifying ADR completeness. Triggers on "write the ADR", "format as MADR", "check ADR quality", "mark gaps in ADR". Also triggers when a decision has been extracted and needs to become a document. Does NOT extract decisions from conversations (use adr-decision-extraction) or orchestrate the full extract-confirm-write workflow (use write-adr).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

existential-birds/beagle822026年9月16日 更新

Use when auditing an agent codebase against the 12-Factor Agents methodology, reviewing LLM-powered system architecture, or assessing agentic app compliance. Triggers on "analyze agent architecture", "12-factor audit", "how compliant is this agent", or "evaluate this LLM app". Also applies when comparing frameworks or planning agent improvements. Not for quick checklists — this performs deep per-factor codebase analysis with file-level evidence.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

existential-birds/beagle822026年9月16日 更新

Vercel AI Elements for workflow UI components. Use when building chat interfaces, displaying tool execution, showing reasoning/thinking, or creating job queues. Triggers on ai-elements, Queue, Confirmation, Tool, Reasoning, Shimmer, Loader, Message, Conversation, PromptInput.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

existential-birds/beagle822026年9月16日 更新

Reviews App Intents code for intent structure, entities, shortcuts, and parameters. Use when reviewing code with import AppIntents, @AppIntent, AppEntity, AppShortcutsProvider, or @Parameter.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

existential-birds/beagle822026年9月16日 更新

Use when the user wants a cited, structured read of local documents and project knowledge. Triggers on: "analyze these docs", "scan my project for context", "read the docs folder", "summarize what's in .beagle/concepts/", "extract context from docs/", "what's in this folder", "go read everything in X and tell me what's there". Also invoked programmatically by other beagle skills (prfaq-beagle Ignition, brainstorm-beagle reference points, strategy-interview context grounding) via the companion contract. Does NOT trigger on codebase lookups ("find this function", "search the repo"), web research (use web-research), LLM-as-judge evaluation (use llm-judge), or document editing (use humanize-beagle). Produces a written scan plan, parallel-subagent findings, and a cited synthesis report on disk — never inline prose, never unsourced claims.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

existential-birds/beagle822026年9月16日 更新

existential-birds のスキルをすべて見る

このスキルの問題を報告する