m02-resource

zhanghandong/rust-skills · updated Apr 8, 2026

MDX-style export adds YAML metadata + attribution linking explainx.ai and this canonical listing URL.

$npx skills add https://github.com/zhanghandong/rust-skills --skill m02-resource
0 commentsdiscussion
summary

Smart pointer and resource ownership patterns for Rust heap allocation and reference counting.

  • Guides ownership decisions through a three-step model: single vs. shared ownership, single-threaded vs. multi-threaded context, and presence of reference cycles
  • Covers six core types (Box, Rc, Arc, Weak, Cell, RefCell) with a decision flowchart and quick reference table for choosing the right pattern
  • Includes common errors and anti-patterns with fixes, such as using Weak to break cycles, av
skill.md

Resource Management

Layer 1: Language Mechanics

Core Question

What ownership pattern does this resource need?

Before choosing a smart pointer, understand:

  • Is ownership single or shared?
  • Is access single-threaded or multi-threaded?
  • Are there potential cycles?

Error → Design Question

Error Don't Just Say Ask Instead
"Need heap allocation" "Use Box" Why can't this be on stack?
Rc memory leak "Use Weak" Is the cycle necessary in design?
RefCell panic "Use try_borrow" Is runtime check the right approach?
Arc overhead complaint "Accept it" Is multi-thread access actually needed?

Thinking Prompt

Before choosing a smart pointer:

  1. What's the ownership model?

    • Single owner → Box or owned value
    • Shared ownership → Rc/Arc
    • Weak reference → Weak
  2. What's the thread context?

    • Single-thread → Rc, Cell, RefCell
    • Multi-thread → Arc, Mutex, RwLock
  3. Are there cycles?

    • Yes → One direction must be Weak
    • No → Regular Rc/Arc is fine

Trace Up ↑

When pointer choice is unclear, trace to design:

"Should I use Arc or Rc?"
    ↑ Ask: Is this data shared across threads?
    ↑ Check: m07-concurrency (thread model)
    ↑ Check: domain-* (performance constraints)
Situation Trace To Question
Rc vs Arc confusion m07-concurrency What's the concurrency model?
RefCell panics m03-mutability Is interior mutability right here?
Memory leaks m12-lifecycle Where should cleanup happen?

Trace Down ↓

From design to implementation:

"Need single-owner heap data"
    ↓ Use: Box<T>

"Need shared immutable data (single-thread)"
    ↓ Use: Rc<T>

"Need shared immutable data (multi-thread)"
    ↓ Use: Arc<T>

"Need to break reference cycle"
    ↓ Use: Weak<T>

"Need shared mutable data"
    ↓ Single-thread: Rc<RefCell<T>>
    ↓ Multi-thread: Arc<Mutex<T>> or Arc<RwLock<T>>

Quick Reference

Type Ownership Thread-Safe Use When
Box<T> Single Yes Heap allocation, recursive types
Rc<T> Shared No Single-thread shared ownership
Arc<T> Shared Yes Multi-thread shared ownership
Weak<T> Weak ref Same as Rc/Arc Break reference cycles
Cell<T> Single No Interior mutability (Copy types)
RefCell<T> Single No Interior mutability (runtime check)

Decision Flowchart

Need heap allocation?
├─ Yes → Single owner?
│        ├─ Yes → Box<T>
│        └─ No → Multi-thread?
│                ├─ Yes → Arc<T>
│                └─ No → Rc<T>
└─ No → Stack allocation (default)

Have reference cycles?
├─ Yes → Use Weak for one direction
└─ No → Regular Rc/Arc

Need interior mutability?
├─ Yes → Thread-safe needed?
│        ├─ Yes → Mutex<T> or RwLock<T>
│        └─ No → T: Copy? → Cell<T> : RefCell<T>
└─ No → Use &mut T

Common Errors

Problem Cause Fix
Rc cycle leak Mutual strong refs Use Weak for one direction
RefCell panic Borrow conflict at runtime Use try_borrow or restructure
Arc overhead Atomic ops in hot path Consider Rc if single-threaded
Box unnecessary Data fits on stack Remove Box

Anti-Patterns

Anti-Pattern Why Bad Better
Arc everywhere Unnecessary atomic overhead Use Rc for single-thread
RefCell everywhere Runtime panics Design clear ownership
Box for small types Unnecessary allocation Stack allocation
Ignore Weak for cycles Memory leaks Design parent-child with Weak

Related Skills

When See
Ownership errors m01-ownership
Interior mutability details m03-mutability
Multi-thread context m07-concurrency
Resource lifecycle m12-lifecycle
how to use m02-resource

How to use m02-resource on Cursor

AI-first code editor with Composer

1

Prerequisites

Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:

  • Cursor installed and configured on your development machine
  • Node.js version 16.0+ with npm package manager (verify with node --version)
  • Active project directory or workspace where you want to add m02-resource
2

Execute installation command

Execute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:

$npx skills add https://github.com/zhanghandong/rust-skills --skill m02-resource

The skills CLI fetches m02-resource from GitHub repository zhanghandong/rust-skills and configures it for Cursor.

3

Select Cursor when prompted

The CLI will show a list of available agents. Use arrow keys to navigate and space to select Cursor:

◆ Which agents do you want to install to?
│ ── Universal (.agents/skills) ── always included ────
│ • Amp
│ • Antigravity
│ • Cline
│ • Codex
│ ●Cursor(selected)
│ • Cursor
│ • Windsurf
4

Verify installation

Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:

.cursor/skills/m02-resource

Reload or restart Cursor to activate m02-resource. Access the skill through slash commands (e.g., /m02-resource) or your agent's skill management interface.

Security & Verification Notice

We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.

Skills execute code in your development environment. Always verify the publisher's identity, review recent commits, and test in isolated environments before production deployment.

List & Monetize Your Skill

Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning

GET_STARTED →

Use Cases

User Story & Requirements Generation

Create detailed user stories, acceptance criteria, and feature specs

Example

Generate user stories for 'password reset feature' with acceptance criteria, edge cases, and test scenarios

Reduce spec writing time by 50%, ensure comprehensive coverage

Competitive Analysis

Research competitors, compare features, identify gaps

Example

Analyze 5 competitor products, create feature comparison matrix, suggest differentiation opportunities

Complete competitive research in 2 hours instead of 2 days

Roadmap Prioritization

Evaluate features using frameworks (RICE, ICE, Kano) and create prioritized backlogs

Example

Score 20 feature ideas using RICE framework, generate prioritized roadmap with rationale

Make data-driven prioritization decisions faster

Stakeholder Communication

Draft PRDs, status updates, and stakeholder presentations

Example

Create executive summary of Q3 roadmap, monthly progress report, feature launch announcement

Save 3-5 hours/week on communication overhead

Implementation Guide

Prerequisites

  • Claude Desktop or compatible AI client
  • Access to product documentation and roadmap tools (Jira, Notion, etc.)
  • Understanding of product management frameworks (RICE, Jobs-to-be-Done, etc.)
  • Stakeholder contact information and communication channels

Time Estimate

30-60 minutes to see productivity improvements

Installation Steps

  1. 1.Install product management skill
  2. 2.Start with user story generation for known feature
  3. 3.Progress to competitive analysis: research 2-3 competitors
  4. 4.Use for roadmap prioritization: apply RICE/ICE scoring
  5. 5.Draft stakeholder communications and refine based on feedback
  6. 6.Build template library for recurring PM tasks
  7. 7.Share effective prompts with product team

Common Pitfalls

  • Not validating competitive research—verify facts before sharing
  • Accepting user stories without involving engineering team
  • Over-relying on frameworks without qualitative judgment
  • Not customizing outputs to company culture and communication style
  • Skipping stakeholder validation of generated requirements

Best Practices

✓ Do

  • +Validate research and competitive analysis with real data
  • +Collaborate with engineering when generating technical requirements
  • +Customize frameworks and templates to your company context
  • +Use skill for first drafts, refine with stakeholder input
  • +Document successful prompt patterns for PM tasks
  • +Combine AI efficiency with human judgment and intuition

✗ Don't

  • Don't publish competitive analysis without fact-checking
  • Don't finalize user stories without engineering review
  • Don't make prioritization decisions solely on AI scoring
  • Don't skip customer validation of generated requirements
  • Don't ignore company-specific context and culture

💡 Pro Tips

  • Provide context: company goals, constraints, customer feedback
  • Ask for alternatives: 'Show 3 ways to prioritize this roadmap'
  • Request stakeholder-specific formatting: 'Executive summary vs. engineering spec'
  • Use skill for 70% generation + 30% customization to company needs

When to Use This

✓ Use When

Use for user story writing, competitive research, roadmap prioritization, stakeholder communication, and PRD drafting. Best for reducing repetitive documentation and research work.

✗ Avoid When

Avoid for strategic product vision (requires deep customer empathy), pricing decisions (needs market and financial expertise), or when face-to-face customer discovery is more valuable than speed.

Learning Path

  1. 1Basic: user stories, feature specs, status updates
  2. 2Intermediate: competitive analysis, prioritization frameworks, PRDs
  3. 3Advanced: product strategy, go-to-market planning, OKR setting
  4. 4Expert: product vision, market positioning, business model innovation

Discussion

Product Hunt–style comments (not star reviews)
  • No comments yet — start the thread.
general reviews

Ratings

4.668 reviews
  • Kabir Yang· Dec 24, 2024

    Keeps context tight: m02-resource is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.

  • Lucas Okafor· Dec 24, 2024

    I recommend m02-resource for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.

  • Alexander Bansal· Dec 20, 2024

    Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: m02-resource is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.

  • Anaya Yang· Dec 16, 2024

    m02-resource has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.

  • Isabella Jackson· Dec 12, 2024

    m02-resource reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.

  • Jin Wang· Dec 12, 2024

    m02-resource has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.

  • Nikhil Nasser· Nov 15, 2024

    Registry listing for m02-resource matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.

  • Anaya Martinez· Nov 11, 2024

    We added m02-resource from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.

  • Alexander Sanchez· Nov 7, 2024

    m02-resource fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.

  • Amina Jain· Nov 3, 2024

    m02-resource is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.

showing 1-10 of 68

1 / 7