SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BD responsive-breakpoints

Framer-style responsive breakpoint editing in Design: one DOM tree per screen with cascading width-scoped overrides. Use when adding/removing breakpoints, editing a design at a specific device width, resolving which value renders at a width, or persisting responsive style changes.

BuilderIO/agent-native Agent Skills author: BuilderIO 1 file body ≈ 1 278 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 3 d ago

Framer-style responsive breakpoint editing in Design: one DOM tree per screen with cascading width-scoped overrides.

As a process D 48/100 · Unfinished process — weak spots: result and completion, when it triggers, inputs and preconditions

GeneratorWriting and documentstype and topics are labelled automatically from the skill text
Runs in: Claude / Claude Code ChatGPT / Codex Gemini CLI Cursor GitHub Copilot / VS Code Qwen Code Kimi Code CLI Z.ai (GLM) DeepSeek (Deep Code) Mistral Vibe LangChain (deepagents) OpenClaw Goose OpenCode
JSON
Technical rating
B
92/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
80
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
D
48/100
Unfinished process
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Failures and branches w 10
0
the three weakest of ten parameters · all ten

How to improve

    For the model run — optional
    • Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
    • A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.

    Guard findings · 0

    ✓ No critical or high findings

    Files scanned: 1. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.

    Against the Agent Skills spec

    • note edit-residue the text marks something as outdated (lines 68, 74): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions

    Process rating: all ten parameters 48/100

    • 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
    • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
    • 0Failures and branches. Linear process with no failure handling
    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 20When it triggers. No condition that starts the skill
    • 30Running it twice. 8 mutating operations with no state check
    • 85Steps. 16 steps, 1 vague phrases
    • 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 1278 tokens

    Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.

    Quality signals

    • +5Description has no quoted example phrases that should trigger the skill
    • +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
    • +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
    • +4No input/output examples
    • +1No license
    • +2Single-language instructions
    • +3Description length 281: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 5 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 16 items

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 80.