SKILLEMALL.ai
GitHub ↗ RU Sign in

BC markstream-custom-components

Override built-in Markstream node renderers and add trusted custom tags across Vue, React, Svelte, and Angular. Use when Codex needs scoped `setCustomComponents`, renderer-local React `streamingComponents` or `htmlComponents`, Angular/Svelte `customComponents`, Vue app-scoped components, node override keys such as `image`, `code_block`, `mermaid`, or `link`, or nested renderers for tags such as `thinking`.

Simon-He95/markstream-vue Agent Skills author: Simon-He95 3 files body ≈ 838 tokens Open the sourcegithub.com↗ analyzed 6 d ago

Override built-in Markstream node renderers and add trusted custom tags across Vue, React, Svelte, and Angular.

As a process C 55/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, running it twice

GeneratorSoftware developmenttype 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
94/100
safety, quality, tests
Safety 60%
100
Quality 40%
84
Run on models
none yet
Process rating
C
55/100
Has gaps
Result and completion w 14
0
Inputs and preconditions w 11
0
Progress reporting w 2
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: 3. 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    • note edit-residue the text marks something as outdated (lines 16, 30): check that old rules are not kept next to new ones — the full check reads the text for contradictions

    Process rating: all ten parameters 55/100

    • 0Result and completion. Does not say what the result is
    • 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
    • 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
    • 30Running it twice. 2 mutating operations with no state check
    • 55Failures and branches. 1 branches
    • 60Tools and files. Uses tools (bash, node) that frontmatter does not declare
    • 70When it triggers. States when to use, but not when not to
    • 100Steps. 34 steps
    • 100Consistency. Name and required fields are in place
    • 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 838 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 409: enough signal without eating the budget
    • +4Structure: 4 headings
    • +3Step-by-step instructions: 34 items
    • +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (1 of 1)

    Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 84.