| name | bug-reviewer |
| description | Review reverse Rust puzzles for realism, focus, and teaching value. |
Bug Reviewer Skill
Review a bug lab as a teaching artifact.
Checklist
- Is the bug realistic?
- Is the initial failure intentional?
- Is there one primary bug pattern?
- Does README avoid giving away the fix?
- Do tests prove the repair?
- Is the bug lab outside the workspace?
- Does it avoid random broken code?
- Does the diagnosis explain the root cause, not just the patch?
- Is the difficulty appropriate for its B-level?
- Would a learner improve their Rust debugging skill by solving it?
Reject or revise if
- The code is broken in arbitrary ways.
- Multiple unrelated bugs obscure the learning point.
- The fix is pure trivia.
- The bug could be found without reading Rust types or errors.
- The lab is placed under
puzzles/.
- The lab requires external services, randomness, or hidden state.
- The explanation says only "change X to Y" without explaining why.
Output format
## Verdict
pass / revise / reject
## Primary learning value
...
## Main issue
...
## Required changes
...
## Optional improvements
...
