macros-code-review

$npx mdskill add existential-birds/beagle/macros-code-review

Reviews Rust macros for hygiene, safety, and performance issues.

  • Ensures macro hygiene and prevents fragment misuse in Rust code.
  • Depends on Cargo.toml, syn, quote, and proc-macro2 libraries.
  • Checks macro type, necessity, and scans definitions against a checklist.
  • Reports findings only after passing all verification gates.

SKILL.md

.github/skills/macros-code-reviewView on GitHub ↗
---
name: macros-code-review
description: "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."
---

# 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](../review-verification-protocol/SKILL.md) skill, including **Macro-Specific Verification** for hygiene, fragment type, and proc-macro performance claims. **Then** add findings.

## Output Format

Report findings as:

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

## Quick Reference

| Issue Type | Reference |
|------------|-----------|
| Fragment types, repetition, hygiene boundaries (vars vs types), `$crate` paths, TT-muncher pattern + recursion limits, fragment-matcher follow restrictions, decl-vs-proc decision tree | [references/declarative-macros.md](references/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 tests | [references/procedural-macros.md](references/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

More from existential-birds/beagle

SkillDescription
adr-decision-extractionUse 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 \u2014 use adr-writing or write-adr for that.
adr-writingUse 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).
agent-architecture-analysisUse 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 \u2014 this performs deep per-factor codebase analysis with file-level evidence.
app-intents-code-reviewReviews App Intents code for intent structure, entities, shortcuts, and parameters. Use when reviewing code with import AppIntents, @AppIntent, AppEntity, AppShortcutsProvider, or @Parameter.
artifact-analysisUse 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.
axum-code-reviewReviews axum web framework code for routing patterns, extractor usage, middleware, state management, and error handling. Use when reviewing Rust code that uses axum, tower, or hyper for HTTP services. Covers axum 0.7+ patterns including State, Path, Query, Json extractors.
brainstorm-beagleUse when the user has a fuzzy idea and wants to shape it into a concrete project spec before planning or building. Triggers on: \"brainstorm this\", \"I have an idea for...\", \"help me think through this project\", \"what should I build\", \"spec this out\". Also catches vague feature descriptions needing structured questioning to clarify scope. Does NOT write code, plan implementation, review strategy docs, or run strategy interviews \u2014 produces a WHAT/WHY spec through dialogue, not a HOW plan.
bubbletea-code-reviewReviews BubbleTea TUI code for proper Elm architecture, model/update/view patterns, and Lipgloss styling. Use when reviewing terminal UI code using charmbracelet/bubbletea.
cloudkit-code-reviewReviews CloudKit code for container setup, record handling, subscriptions, and sharing patterns. Use when reviewing code with import CloudKit, CKContainer, CKRecord, CKShare, or CKSubscription.
combine-code-reviewReviews Combine framework code for memory leaks, operator misuse, and error handling. Use when reviewing code with import Combine, AnyPublisher, @Published, PassthroughSubject, or CurrentValueSubject.