flutter-code-quality
Skill2 starsChanged 41 days agoMITView on GitHub
Review changed Flutter/Dart files against the Flutter conventions, testing guidance and code quality checklist, then fix the findings. Use after implementing or changing Flutter code, or when asked to review files for quality.
In this repository4 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- flutter-capture-patternSkill
- flutter-conventionsSkill
- flutter-testingSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
2 rules. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈1
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Very specific: line 23
After edits, rerun code generation if providers or models changed and run dart analyze.
- Distinctive: line 28
When asked to check specific files or a folder outside an implementation task, run the same subagent and present the findings without …
≈ “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
Flutter Code Quality
A read-only subagent reads the changed files against flutter-conventions, flutter-testing and references/checklist.md (rules a static analyzer cannot express: state placement, sealed types, provider shapes, collection idioms, widget extraction, test layering) and returns terse file:line findings. You, the implementing agent, decide which to apply and make the edits, because you know why the code looks the way it does.
Scope
The files changed by the current task: git diff --name-only plus untracked .dart files, or the files the user names. Skip generated files (*.g.dart, *.gr.dart, *.freezed.dart, lib/generated/).
Running the check
Delegate to the flutter-code-quality-reviewer subagent with the file list and the change's intent in a line, through whatever your harness provides for running a named subagent. Without such a subagent, read the same sources yourself and review the files against them.
The subagent returns findings grouped by file, each as path:line - issue → fix, naming the source rule when it is not the checklist, and ✓ pass for clean files. It does not edit anything.
Acting on findings
- Apply a finding unless it conflicts with a project rule in
AGENTS.md, would change behaviour, or the rule does not fit the situation (for example aStatefulWidgetthe hooks cannot replace). Say which findings you skipped and why, in one line each. - After edits, rerun code generation if providers or models changed and run
dart analyze. A second check is only needed when the fixes were large. - A clean report ends the check; do not look for more.
Standalone use
When asked to check specific files or a folder outside an implementation task, run the same subagent and present the findings without fixing, unless the user asked for fixes.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
Reviews can't be read right now.
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.

