Skip to main content

score-style

Score migrated code against style guidelines and best practices. Evaluates code quality independent of functional correctness.

معلومات المصدر

المستودع
OpenHands/extensions
آخر نشاط في المصدر
٦ مارس ٢٠٢٦ في ١٨:٣٦
لغة SKILL.md المكتشفة
الإنجليزية
النجوم
١٧٩
التفرعات
١٢٦

خيارات التثبيت

يُحدَّد Prompt الذي يراجع المصدر أولًا بشكل افتراضي. يمكنك التبديل إلى أمر مباشر أو تنزيل نسخة محلية.

مراجعة ملفات المصدر

اقرأ SKILL.md وأي ملفات مرافقة يعرضها SkillsMP قبل أن تقرر التثبيت.

عرض SKILL.md

SKILL.md
تعليمات المصدر · معاينة للقراءة فقط
name
score-style
description
Score migrated code against style guidelines and best practices. Evaluates code quality independent of functional correctness.
license
MIT
compatibility
Requires target code to evaluate
triggers
["style score","code quality score","style evaluation"]
Evaluate migrated code against style guidelines and best practices. This skill scores code quality aspects that are independent of functional correctness — focusing on readability, maintainability, and adherence to conventions. ## Default Scoring Criteria Unless a custom rubric is provided, score on these attributes (1-5 scale): ### Naming Conventions (1-5) - 1: Inconsistent or meaningless names - 3: Mostly follows conventions, some issues - 5: Clear, consistent, idiomatic names ### Code Organization (1-5) - 1: Monolithic, hard to navigate - 3: Some structure, could be cleaner - 5: Well-organized, logical structure ### Error Handling (1-5) - 1: Missing or swallowed exceptions - 3: Basic error handling present - 5: Comprehensive, appropriate error handling ### Documentation (1-5) - 1: No documentation - 3: Some documentation, inconsistent - 5: Thorough, helpful documentation ### Idiomaticity (1-5) - 1: Non-idiomatic, smells like translated code - 3: Mostly idiomatic, some foreign patterns - 5: Fully idiomatic, natural code ## Output Format Save scores as a JSON file: ```json { "target_file_a.java": { "naming_conventions": 4, "code_organization": 3, "error_handling": 5, "documentation": 4, "idiomaticity": 4, "justification": "Good naming and error handling. Some methods could be extracted for better organization." } } ``` ## Custom Rubric If a custom rubric is provided, use its attributes and scoring criteria instead of the defaults. The rubric should define: - Attribute names - Score meanings for each level (1-5) - Examples of good/bad code for each attribute ## Evaluation Guidelines ### What to Look For **Positive indicators:** - Consistent naming (camelCase for Java, snake_case for Python) - Appropriate class/method sizes - Single responsibility principle followed - Meaningful comments (not obvious ones) - Standard library usage over custom implementations - Defensive programming practices **Negative indicators:** - Literal translations (COBOL-style Java) - God classes or methods - Magic numbers - Excessive comments or no comments - Reinvented wheels - Swallowed exceptions - Hardcoded values ### Language-Specific Considerations **Java:** - Streams vs. for loops (both acceptable, but be consistent) - Optional vs. null checks - Record types for data classes - Builder pattern for complex objects **Python:** - Type hints - List comprehensions - Context managers - Pythonic idioms ## Incremental Scoring If a score file already exists, update it with new scores rather than replacing it entirely.
عرض على GitHub