go-performance-review
Skill30 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Review Go code for performance issues including slice/map pre-allocation, string concatenation, N+1 queries, connection pool configuration, sync.Pool, memory alignment, lock scope, buffered I/O, and HTTP transport tuning. Trigger when code contains make(), loops, database queries, string building, sync primitives, HTTP clients, or hot-path operations. Use for performance-focused review.
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- eduardo-sl/go-agent-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- eduardo-sl/go-agent-skills★ 85same 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 repository52 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- api-designSkill
- api-integration-testSkill
- constructive-thinkingSkill
- create-prSkill
- deep-researchSkill
- e2e-testSkill
- fuzzing-testSkill
- git-commitSkill
- go-benchmarkSkill
- go-ci-workflowSkill
- go-code-reviewerSkill
- go-concurrency-reviewSkill
- go-dependency-auditSkill
- go-error-reviewSkill
- go-logic-reviewSkill
- go-makefile-writerSkill
- go-observability-reviewSkill
- google-searchSkill
- go-quality-reviewSkill
- go-review-leadSkill
- go-security-reviewSkill
- go-test-reviewSkill
- incident-postmortemSkill
- kafka-event-driven-designSkill
- load-testSkill
- local-transcriptSkill
- log-analyzerSkill
- mongo-migrationSkill
- monitoring-alertingSkill
- mysql-migrationSkill
- oceanbase-table-designSkill
- oracle-migrationSkill
- pg-migrationSkill
- readme-generatorSkill
- redis-cache-strategySkill
- security-reviewSkill
- stock-analysis-leadSkill
- stock-balance-sheet-reviewSkill
- stock-business-reviewSkill
- stock-earnings-quality-reviewSkill
- stock-industry-reviewSkill
- stock-management-reviewSkill
- stock-peer-comparison-reviewSkill
- systematic-debuggingSkill
- tdd-workflowSkill
- tech-doc-writerSkill
- thirdparty-api-integration-testSkill
- unit-testSkill
- update-docSkill
- writing-plansSkill
- yt-dlp-downloaderSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
8 rules. About 0 are common, 6 are distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈6
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
2
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 33
Read go.mod. Key: strings.Clone (1.20+), slices.Clone (1.21+).
- Distinctive: line 36
MUST quote specific evidence.
- Distinctive: line 44
Hot-path rule: Do NOT flag performance issues in cold-path code (startup, one-time init, config loading, test setup, CLI argument parsing).
- Distinctive: line 63
Run grep for all grep-gated checklist items against target files
- Distinctive: line 81
All Medium severity unless marked (Low).
- Distinctive: line 109
Do NOT flag cold-path optimizations
- Very specific: line 171
If no issues found: state No performance findings identified.
- Distinctive: line 184
Distinguish hot-path vs cold-path: only flag frequently executed code
≈ “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
Go Performance Review
Purpose
Identify performance issues and resource inefficiency in Go code. This skill exists because performance findings are almost all Medium severity and get systematically crowded out when mixed with High-severity Security/Concurrency findings.
Important distinction: lock contention is performance (here); race condition is concurrency (go-concurrency-review).
This skill does NOT cover: security, concurrency correctness, code style, test quality, error handling, or business logic — those belong to sibling vertical skills.
When To Use
- Code contains
make([]T, ...)ormake(map[K]V, ...) - Code builds strings in loops
- Code queries DB/Redis inside loops
- Code configures connection pools or HTTP clients
- Code runs on hot paths (per-request, high-frequency)
When NOT To Use
- Security vulnerabilities →
go-security-review - Race conditions, goroutine leaks →
go-concurrency-review - Code style/lint →
go-quality-review - Error handling →
go-error-review
Mandatory Gates
1) Go Version Gate
Read go.mod. Key: strings.Clone (1.20+), slices.Clone (1.21+).
2) Anti-Example Suppression Gate
MUST quote specific evidence. Category match alone insufficient.
Embedded anti-examples:
- "Should pre-allocate slice" — when slice is small (<16 elements) or size is truly unknown at creation time. Must cite evidence the slice is large and size is known.
- "Should use sync.Pool" — when object is small and allocated infrequently (cold path, startup, config).
- "Struct fields should be reordered" — when struct has <4 fields or alignment savings <8 bytes.
- "Should use strings.Clone" — when both substring and parent are short-lived locals in same GC scope.
- "Add Count-First guard" — when the business domain guarantees the query always returns rows (e.g., seeded reference data, system-level lookups). Must cite evidence that total==0 is impossible in practice.
- Hot-path rule: Do NOT flag performance issues in cold-path code (startup, one-time init, config loading, test setup, CLI argument parsing). Must cite evidence of hot-path execution: "called per HTTP request", "inside for loop over N items", "in handler serving N QPS".
3) Generated Code Exclusion Gate
Exclude: *.pb.go, *_gen.go, mock_*.go.
Workflow
- Define scope — files/diff under review. Apply Generated Code Exclusion Gate.
- Gather evidence — read changed files, identify performance-relevant patterns:
make(),append(), loops, DB queries,strings.Builder,sync.Pool, HTTP clients. - Load references — always load
go-performance-patterns.md; loadgo-database-patterns.mdwhen DB code present. - Classify hot-path vs cold-path — only flag issues in frequently executed code. Cite execution frequency evidence.
- Evaluate ALL 13 checklist items with quantification → suppress cold-path items → format output.
Grep-Gated Execution Protocol
This skill uses mechanical grep pre-scanning to guarantee zero missed checklist items. 11 of 13 items are grep-gated; 2 are semantic-only.
Execution Order
- Identify target files (from dispatch prompt, or write raw snippet to
$TMPDIR/review_snippet.go) - Run grep for all grep-gated checklist items against target files
- HIT → run semantic analysis to confirm or reject (verify hot-path, quantify impact)
- MISS → auto-mark NOT FOUND, skip semantic analysis
- For compound patterns: run primary grep, then check secondary condition
- For semantic-only items (items 6, 9): full model reasoning
- Report only FOUND items
Grep Audit Line
Include in Execution Status: Grep pre-scan: X/11 items hit, Z confirmed as findings (2 semantic-only)
Key Compound Pattern: Slice Pre-allocation (Item 1)
This is the highest-priority compound pattern — it catches the most common performance miss:
- Primary:
make\(\[\]HIT - Secondary: check if the make call has only 2 args (no capacity) AND an upper bound is known (e.g.,
len(input)) - Example:
make([]*User, 0)whenlen(userKeys)is available → FINDING
Performance Checklist (12 Items)
All Medium severity unless marked (Low).
| # | Item | Quantification Pattern | Grep Pattern |
| 1 | Missing slice pre-allocation | make([]T, 0) when upper bound known → "N grow-and-copy → 1 allocation" | make\(\[\] (compound: AND NOT 3-arg make with capacity — check for make\(\[\][^,]+,\s*\d+,\s*\d+\) absent) |
| 2 | String concatenation in loop | += in loop → strings.Builder + Grow() — "N allocations + N copies → 1" | \+=\s*""|\+=\s*\w+\s*$ (compound: inside for loop — semantic confirmation) |
| 3 | N+1 query | Individual DB/Redis calls in loop → batch WHERE IN or pipeline — "N round-trips → 1" | \.Query|\.Exec|\.Get|\.Set (compound: inside for loop — N+1 detection) |
| 4 | Missing connection pool config | Missing SetMaxOpenConns, SetMaxIdleConns, SetConnMaxLifetime — connection exhaustion risk | SetMaxOpenConns|SetMaxIdleConns|SetConnMaxLifetime|sql\.Open|pgx\.Connect |
| 5 | Missing sync.Pool | Hot-path allocations without pooling; pool without Reset before Put — quantify allocation frequency | sync\.Pool |
| 6 | Struct memory alignment | Fields poorly ordered → fieldalignment tool — quantify savings in bytes per instance | Semantic-Only (struct field alignment requires counting fields and sizes) |
| 7 | Substring memory retention | Large string sliced, small substring retains backing array → strings.Clone (Go 1.20+) | strings\.Clone|[:]\w*\] (substring retention — semantic confirmation required) |
| 8 | Oversized lock scope | Mutex where atomic suffices; critical section includes non-critical I/O — quantify contention | sync\.Mutex|sync\.RWMutex|\.Lock\(\) (compound: check if lock held across I/O) |
| 9 | Missing sharded lock (Low) | Single mutex on high-contention data → sharded locks — only for proven bottleneck | Semantic-Only (sharded lock pattern requires understanding contention — rarely applicable) |
| 10 | Missing buffered I/O | Frequent small reads/writes without bufio — "5-50x syscall reduction" | os\.Open|os\.Create|os\.Write|os\.Read|net\.Conn (compound: AND NOT bufio\.) |
| 11 | Inefficient JSON encoding | json.Marshal/Unmarshal on stream → json.NewEncoder/Decoder — "eliminates []byte allocation" | json\.Marshal|json\.Unmarshal (compound: AND stream-compatible context — semantic) |
| 12 | Untuned HTTP Transport | http.DefaultClient without timeout; MaxIdleConnsPerHost default 2 too low for high-throughput | http\.DefaultClient|http\.Get|http\.Post|http\.Client |
| 13 | Missing Count-First guard in pagination query | Function returns (list, total) with a Count + Find pair but no zero-guard. Reorder to Count-First: run Count → if total == 0 return early → only then run Find. Eliminates Find DB round-trip (full row-data transfer) for empty result sets — common for new tenants, inactive users, sparse data. Anti-example: when business domain guarantees total always > 0 (seeded reference tables, system lookups). | \.Count\(& (compound: confirm .Find\( also present in same function AND no if.*total.*==.*0 or if total == 0 early-exit guard) |
Severity Rubric
Medium — Performance issue impacting latency, throughput, or resource usage under load.
Low — Minor optimization with limited real-world impact.
Evidence Rules
- Quantify when possible: "N+1 executes N round-trips", "slice grows through log2(N) allocations"
- For pre-allocation: state the known upper bound and current allocation
- Hot-path requirement: cite evidence code runs frequently (per-request, in loop, high-QPS handler)
- Do NOT flag cold-path optimizations
- Merge rule: same issue at ≥3 locations → one finding with location list
Output Format
Findings
[Medium|Low] Short Title
- ID: PERF-NNN
- Location:
path:line - Impact: Quantified performance consequence (allocations, syscalls, round-trips)
- Evidence: Current code vs optimal pattern
- Recommendation: Specific fix with code example
- Action:
follow-up(performance issues are rarelymust-fix)
Suppressed Items
[Suppressed] Short Title
- Reason: Anti-example matched + evidence cited (cold-path, small size, etc.)
Execution Status
Go version: X.YGrep pre-scan: X/11 items hit, Z confirmed as findings (2 semantic-only)Excluded (generated): list or NoneReferences loaded: list
Summary
1-2 lines. Count by severity.
Example Output
### Findings
#### [Medium] Slice Pre-allocation Missing in Hot Path
- **ID:** PERF-001
- **Location:** `internal/service/batch.go:42`
- **Impact:** len(userIDs) allocations per request instead of 1 — slice grows via append in loop processing user batch
- **Evidence:** `results := make([]User, 0)` at L42; `results = append(results, user)` in loop at L48; `len(userIDs)` is known at L40
- **Recommendation:** `results := make([]User, 0, len(userIDs))`
- **Action:** follow-up
#### [Medium] N+1 Query in Order Processing
- **ID:** PERF-002
- **Location:** `internal/service/order.go:55-60`
- **Impact:** N database round-trips per batch — one SELECT per order item
- **Evidence:** `for _, item := range items { product, _ := repo.GetProduct(ctx, item.ProductID) }` — N individual queries
- **Recommendation:** Batch: `products, err := repo.GetProductsByIDs(ctx, productIDs)` with `WHERE id IN (?)`
- **Action:** follow-up
### Suppressed Items
#### [Suppressed] Slice Pre-allocation in Config Loading
- **Reason:** `make([]Plugin, 0)` at config.go:12 — cold path (called once at startup, typically <5 plugins). Anti-example: "small slice in cold path"
### Execution Status
- Go version: 1.21
- Excluded (generated): None
- References loaded: go-performance-patterns.md, go-database-patterns.md
### Summary
2 Medium findings (slice pre-allocation, N+1 query). Cold-path items suppressed.No-Finding Case
If no issues found: state No performance findings identified. Still output Execution Status.
Load References Selectively
| Reference | Load When |
references/go-performance-patterns.md | Always |
references/go-database-patterns.md | Code involves database queries, connection pools |
references/go-review-anti-examples.md | Always |
Review Discipline
- Performance only — not security, concurrency, quality, tests, errors, or logic
- Execute ALL 13 checklist items — this is the most commonly skipped dimension; isolation solves that
- Distinguish hot-path vs cold-path: only flag frequently executed code
- Quantify impact — "costs N allocations per request" is better than "suboptimal"
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.

