Loading skill
Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →majiayu000/design-agent-native
Build applications where agents are first-class citizens.
Passed 17 of 22 test cases with the skill, and 11 of 22 without it.
and 7 more in the full report
7 fixed10 passed either way4 still failing1 broke
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
One of 7 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
I selected option 3 from the intake menu. I am defining tool definitions for a task management module. My current tool set includes 'create_task' and 'get_task'. I was thinking of keeping it read/create only to prevent accidental destruction of user data. Please evaluate this tool set design and recommend any needed adjustments to satisfy agent-native architecture.
| Checked | Without skill | With skill |
|---|---|---|
| recommends adding task update and delete tools to achieve full CRUD completeness | Passed | Passed |
| explains that withholding update or delete tools breaks parity with user UI capabilities | Missed | Passed |
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
<why_now>
Software agents work reliably now. Claude Code demonstrated that an LLM with access to bash and file tools, operating in a loop until an objective is achieved, can accomplish complex multi-step tasks autonomously.
The surprising discovery: a really good coding agent is actually a really good general-purpose agent. The same architecture that lets Claude Code refactor a codebase can let an agent organize your files, manage your reading list, or automate your workflows.
The Claude Code SDK makes this accessible. You can build applications where features aren't code you write—they're outcomes you describe, achieved by an agent with tools, operating in a loop until the outcome is reached.
This opens up a new field: software that works the way Claude Code works, applied to categories far beyond coding. </why_now>
<core_principles>
Whatever the user can do through the UI, the agent should be able to achieve through tools.
This is the foundational principle. Without it, nothing else matters.
Imagine you build a notes app with a beautiful interface for creating, organizing, and tagging notes. A user asks the agent: "Create a note summarizing my meeting and tag it as urgent."
If you built UI for creating notes but no agent capability to do the same, the agent is stuck. It might apologize or ask clarifying questions, but it can't help—even though the action is trivial for a human using the interface.
The fix: Ensure the agent has tools (or combinations of tools) that can accomplish anything the UI can do.
This isn't about creating a 1:1 mapping of UI buttons to tools. It's about ensuring the agent can achieve the same outcomes. Sometimes that's a single tool (create_note). Sometimes it's composing primitives (write_file to a notes directory with proper formatting).
The discipline: When adding any UI capability, ask: can the agent achieve this outcome? If not, add the necessary tools or primitives.
A capability map helps:
| User Action | How Agent Achieves It |
|---|---|
| Create a note | write_file to notes directory, or create_note tool |
| Tag a note as urgent | update_file metadata, or tag_note tool |
| Search notes | search_files or search_notes tool |
| Delete a note | delete_file or delete_note tool |
test cases passed, vs 11 / 22 without
Published skills whose descriptions closely match this one, with their headline benchmark lift.
More skills from the same source and nearby in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.