rust-fix-discipline

Enforce root-cause-aligned fixes for Rust code audit findings.

6|3|Updated Jun 25, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/dollspace-gay/crosslink --skill rust-fix-discipline-dollspace-gay
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: rust-fix-discipline
Source: https://github.com/dollspace-gay/crosslink/tree/main/crosslink/resources/claude/skills/rust-fix-discipline
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/dollspace-gay/crosslink --skill rust-fix-discipline-dollspace-gay

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

AI coding agents often apply lazy, cosmetic fixes to Rust code when tasked with resolving audit findings, code review comments, lint errors, or failing tests—such as blanket lint suppressions, empty safety comments, or band-aids that don't address the root cause, leading to recurring issues and broken architecture.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • 3-way fix category enforcement: Requires explicit selection of root-cause, local correctness, or annotation fixes for every finding, eliminating vague "fixed the lint" reporting.
  • Forbidden pattern guardrails: Blocks lazy fix patterns like empty SAFETY comments, unilateral workspace changes from leaf crates, and unannounced behavioral changes.
  • Cross-crate coordination: Mandates explicit coordination requests for breaking changes to public APIs or shared workspace abstractions to avoid downstream breakage.
  • Use case: Use when applying fixes to Rust code from any audit, code review, lint sweep, or failing-test triage task, especially for workspaces with strict quality and GPU discipline policies.

Quick Start

Use the rust-fix-discipline skill to apply correct, non-cosmetic fixes to all findings in your latest Rust code audit, following the required pre-fix context review and verification steps.

Frequently Asked Questions about rust-fix-discipline

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I prevent AI agents from applying lazy cosmetic fixes to Rust code during lint remediation?

To prevent lazy cosmetic fixes during Rust lint remediation, enforce a discipline that mandates pre-fix context review and explicit fix category selection. This blocks vague band-aids like empty SAFETY comments or blanket lint suppressions, ensuring fixes align with root causes.

What is the best way to coordinate breaking changes to public APIs in a Rust workspace?

The best way to coordinate breaking changes to public APIs in a Rust workspace is to mandate explicit cross-crate coordination. This prevents unilateral workspace changes from leaf crates and avoids downstream breakage by ensuring all affected crates are aligned before applying fixes.

How do I enforce root cause analysis when resolving clippy errors and code review findings?

Enforce root cause analysis for clippy errors and code review findings by requiring a 3-way fix category selection: root-cause, local correctness, or annotation fixes. This eliminates vague reporting and ensures every finding is addressed at its actual source.

Does this Rust fix discipline approach work for failing test triage and security audits?

Yes, this Rust fix discipline approach works for failing test triage and security audits. It applies to all fix-mode tasks by mandating pre-fix context review, forbidding lazy pattern avoidance, and requiring honest verification reporting to ensure fixes align with existing system architecture.

When should I not use blanket lint suppressions for Rust code fixes?

You should not use blanket lint suppressions for Rust code fixes when addressing security or correctness findings. Disciplined remediation forbids lazy pattern avoidance, requiring explicit fix category selection and honest verification reporting to ensure true root-cause resolution.