react-engineering
Skill0 starsChanged yesterdayMITView on GitHub
Build or review React component contracts, composition, rendering, data flow, bundle, and performance; choose a web runtime or surface. Use for React code, not for visual direction or styling.
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- loganware05/captains-compass-cursortheir own version, first seen Oct 12, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- loganware05/captains-compass-cursor★ 2same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository34 other files it gives its agents.
- astroSkill
- bun-standardsSkill
- postgresSkill
- rust-standardsSkill
- spring-bootSkill
- tailwind-v4Skill
- typescript-standardsSkill
- vitest-testingSkill
- api-designSkill
- architecture-reviewSkill
- benchmark-readiness-reviewSkill
- cli-designSkill
- codebase-scoutingSkill
- code-review-findingsSkill
- config-projection-reviewSkill
- documentation-hygieneSkill
- domain-modelingSkill
- formal-verificationSkill
- implementation-planningSkill
- orchestration-workflowSkill
- problem-clarificationSkill
- product-copySkill
- refactorSkill
- repository-text-hygieneSkill
- researchSkill
- security-scope-reviewSkill
- setup-canastaSkill
- system-designSkill
- task-closeoutSkill
- tddSkill
- technical-writingSkill
- upstream-contributionSkill
- writing-issuesSkill
- writing-prSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
2 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈2
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 34
Verify with the closest executable check: typecheck, lint, the component's tests, a production build, or a profiled interaction.
- Distinctive: line 41
Use the project's accessibility, visual-design and animation guidance as needed.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
React Engineering
One entry point for React implementation and review. Repository evidence owns the installed stack, versions and conventions; these references are defaults and must not override a documented repository choice.
Load only the reference the change needs:
| Change | Reference |
| Choosing a runtime, adding a dependency, creating a surface, React Compiler, or the marketing/application boundary | stack-and-surface.md |
| Rendering, re-renders, data fetching, waterfalls, bundle size, server/client work | React performance guidance and the upstream Vercel rules; consult only the relevant topic |
| Reusable component APIs, boolean-prop growth, compound components, context shape | React composition guidance and upstream composition patterns |
Procedure:
- Find the component's owner and existing patterns before adding new ones. Change one concern at a time.
- For a performance claim, measure first: name the interaction, the profiler or bundle evidence, and the baseline. A rule match is a lead, not a finding; confirm it in the code path users hit.
- A static scanner (such as React Doctor, when a repository adopts it as a command) produces candidates, not findings. Reproduce or trace each before reporting it, and copy no fix the code path does not need.
- Verify with the closest executable check: typecheck, lint, the component's tests, a production build, or a profiled interaction. Say which ran.
For a review, lead with findings by severity with file:line evidence, and
state what was not verified. Do not run a whole-codebase audit unless asked.
Related: typescript-standards for types and tailwind-v4 for styling.
Use the project's accessibility, visual-design and animation guidance as needed.
Upstream reference collections are linked, not bundled in this pack.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.