Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to edochi/mdvs. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/edochi/mdvs/main/.claude/skills/code-editing/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/edochi/mdvsWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/edochi/mdvs/code-editing)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/edochi/mdvs/code-editing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/edochi/mdvs/code-editing/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/edochi/mdvs/code-editing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/edochi/mdvs/code-editing.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00043 | $0.00680 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00272 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00136 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00068 |
Grade A, and why
code-editing scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 10d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 83 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Code Editing Conventions
Before Writing Code
- Read the relevant existing code first. Explore patterns, naming conventions, module structure, and error handling style already in use.
- Match the existing style — don't introduce new patterns unless discussed with the user.
- If the change is non-trivial, plan it with the user before coding.
Writing Code
Style
- No wildcard imports (
use arrow::array::*→ explicit imports) - Name intermediate data structures — no unnamed tuples or raw HashMaps
Fromimpls for infallible type conversions; constructors when extra parameters are needed- Functions that don't use
selfshould be free functions, not methods anyhow::Resultfor error handling in commands and I/O- Follow the enum-based dispatch pattern (not traits) for runtime choices
- Never silently drop data — serialize to JSON rather than storing NULL
- Check for collisions with internal column prefix when adding new fields
Cross-cutting changes
If the change touches the type system, a violation type, a command's output, or storage format — trace through the full pipeline:
discover → schema/config → validation → storage → search → output
Verify each stage handles the change correctly.
Testing
- Write unit tests (
#[cfg(test)] mod tests) for the changed module - Write integration tests for user-facing behavior changes
- Run the full test suite, not just the changed module:
cargo test --features testing-mocks
cargo clippy --all-targets --features testing-mocks
just fmt
Always run just fmt after cargo clippy (not plain cargo fmt: the
rustfmt.toml options need the pinned nightly).
Updating Specs
- Update the relevant spec in
docs/spec/if the change affects documented behavior - Use the
specskill for spec writing conventions
Testing Against example_kb
- Run the affected commands against
example_kbto verify the change works end-to-end - If the change needs a new edge case, add it to
example_kb:- Create or modify files to exercise the new behavior
- Update
example_kb/.plan.mdwith the new edge case - Re-run
mdvs update example_kbandmdvs build example_kb --force
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 10d ago First seen · 83 lines · 43 tokens per session scan A 575916902931
code-editing is a skill published in the GitHub repository edochi/mdvs (27 stars, last pushed 11d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 43 tokens to every session and 680 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-10-05.
Other skills, from other repositories
Complete Rust Development
A comprehensive skill for Rust development that combines error handling, testing, and logging patterns. Demonstrates the 'includes' composition feature by merging content from multiple standalone skills.
project-chmonitor-verify-skill
Project-local .cursor/skills/verify-chmonitor drives the Rust CLI; default doctor is identity-only.
rust-testing-quality
Use when writing, organizing, or running Rust tests — unit, integration, doc-tests, proptest, criterion benchmarks, or cargo-mutants. Not for CI pipeline wiring (rust-tooling-cicd).
rust-testing
Rust testing patterns including unit tests, integration tests, async testing, property-based testing, mocking, and coverage. Follows TDD methodology.
codew-release-qa-sweep
Use before claiming Codewhale release work is done: run the full gate sweep and list the manual QA targets.
cw-gates
Use before claiming any Codewhale change is done, green, or ready to land: the focused-to-broad verification ladder, the budget checks CI enforces, and the rules for what counts as a passing test.