BC variant-design
AI-driven visual/UI design generation with Impeccable design system. Generates 3 distinct design variations from a prompt with built-in scenario materials, design system references (typography, color, spatial, motion, interaction, responsive, UX writing), and anti-AI-slop quality gates. Supports variation actions: Vary strong/subtle, Distill, Change style, Remix colors, Shuffle layout, Polish, Critique, Extract tokens, See other views. Exports to HTML or React. Triggers on: "design options for X", "show me variations", "give me UI directions", "vary this design", "distill this", "change the style", "remix colors", "shuffle layout", "polish this", "critique this", "extract tokens", "design a dashboard/landing page/app/editorial".
As a process C 61/100 · Has gaps — weak spots: result and completion, inputs and preconditions, consistency
How to improve
- Say in the description WHEN to use the skill ("use when…", example requests): that is the agent's main cue.
- The SKILL.md body is over 5,000 tokens: move reference detail into references/ and load it when needed.
- 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: 18. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
- warning
frontmatter-yamlSKILL.md: the frontmatter is not valid YAML (YAML parse error: Nested mappings are not allowed in compact mappings at line 2, column 14: description: AI-driven visual/UI design generation with Impeccable design syste… ^ ); fields were read line by line. The usual cause is a colon inside an unquoted value - warning
description-no-whendescription does not say WHEN to use the skill (no "use when") - warning
body-longSKILL.md body ≈ 7062 tokens (recommended < 5000); move details to references/
Process rating: all ten parameters 61/100
- 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. 18 mutating operations with no state check
- 40Consistency. Frontmatter name (variant-design) differs from the folder (variant-design-skill)
- 70Execution cost. Instruction body is 7062 tokens
- 85Steps. 168 steps, 1 vague phrases
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100When it triggers. States when to use and when not to
- 100Failures and branches. 7 branches, has a failure section
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
- low 10 top-level sections: this looks like several domains in one skill
- low The response is described with custom markup (3 tags): a typed call is more reliable
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
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +3Output format is not stated: the model decides each time
- -5TODO / placeholder text left in the skill
- +1No license
- +2Single-language instructions
- +5Description quotes 12 example trigger phrases
- +3Description length 738: enough signal without eating the budget
- +4Structure: 38 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 168 items
- +4Has examples (1 code blocks)
- +4Reference files are cited in the instructions (8 of 8)
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 56.