agentsclimarketplace

Lookdev auto skill

Skill connerkward/lookdev-auto-skill

lookdev-auto — a Claude Code skill for automated visual tuning: a vision model rates rendered variants in a loop.

Install
npx -y skills add connerkward/lookdev-auto-skill

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

One thing to look at

  • 1 stars1 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Tune a visual/animation/render parameter by eye using a VISION or VIDEO model as the judge — render several labeled variants into ONE artifact, ask the model to rate them and suggest better values, render the suggestions, ask it to pick the best, repeat until good. Use whenever "looks/feels right" is the success criterion and there's no cheap numeric metric — animation easing/timing, zoom/camera feel, color grade, layout/spacing, design params, render/encoder settings, prompt params. The model is the eye; you do the rendering and the loop.

SKILL.md

4.7 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Visual eval loop — let a vision/video model tune what only an eye can judge

When the target is "does this LOOK/FEEL right" (not a number you can minimize), a vision model (image) or video-understanding model (motion/timing) can be the judge in a tight optimize loop. Worked reference: the screenstudio-alternative skill (iteration.py) (tuned zoom-animation feel via fal-ai/video-understanding).

The loop

  1. Render N labeled variants into ONE artifact. Vary the parameter(s) across a small spread. Annotate each variant's params ON the artifact (burn the label in: "A · 2.2Hz · ζ0.5"). Images → a labeled grid/contact sheet. Video/motion → a labeled sequence (label card or burned-in overlay before/over each clip) so the model can compare temporally.
  2. One model call, structured output. Send the single artifact with an explicit rubric (define what "good" means — and what "too much"/"too little" look like). Ask for per-variant ratings + concrete suggested new values as JSON: {"ratings":{"A":n,...},"best_so_far":"X","suggest":[[p1,p2],...]}.
  3. Coarse → fine. Round 1 = wide spread to locate the region. Round 2 = render the model's suggestions (+ carry the current best) into one artifact; ask it to pick the single best. Usually converges in 2 rounds.
  4. Stop when sufficient — best rates high and suggestions cluster. Apply the winner.

Token / quality / step reductions (do these)

  • One artifact per round, not one call per variant. The biggest saver — a 6-variant round is 1 upload + 1 inference, not 6. Montage/grid beats a loop of single calls.
  • Burn params onto the artifact. The model sees label+result together → no separate "variant A used X" context to carry → fewer tokens, fewer mistakes.
  • Structured JSON out + parse. No re-asking, no free-text wrangling. Prompt "return ONLY JSON"; regex the first {...}.
  • Short representative sample. Tune on a 3-5s clip / one frame / one component, not the whole asset. Cheaper render, smaller upload, faster inference. Apply the found params to the full render once.
  • Cap variants at ~5-6. More doesn't improve the model's discrimination and multiplies render + token cost. Wide-but-sparse round 1, narrow round 2.
  • Calibration anchors. Include one deliberately-bad and one safe-default variant as fixed anchors each round — gives the model a reference scale and exposes when its "best" is worse than the safe default (catch a bad recommendation early).
  • Independent rubric, stated up front. Define "good" concretely in the prompt (smooth, subtle settle, not bouncy, not sluggish). Don't ask "which do you like" — that lets it echo your framing. A held-out criterion keeps the judge honest (see verify-outputs-rule: the check must be independent of what you tuned).
  • Reuse renders across rounds. Carry the round-1 winner's clip into round 2 instead of re-rendering it.
  • Early-exit. If round-1 top ≥9/10 and the three suggestions are within a small delta, skip round 2.
  • Cheapest judge that can see the failure. Frames-through an image VLM can judge spatial things (layout, color, crop); only reach for a true video model when the thing being judged is temporal (easing, timing, motion smoothness) — those are invisible in stills.

When NOT to use it

  • A real numeric metric exists and correlates with quality → optimize that directly; don't pay a model per step.
  • The judgment is subjective-to-the-user (their taste, brand) → show them the variants and let them pick; a model's "best" isn't their best. (This is why the screen-studio spring auto-tune was dropped — the model's pick didn't match the owner's eye.)
  • One or two variants → just look yourself.

Caveats (learned)

  • The model's pick is an opinion, not ground truth — anchor it, and sanity-check the winner against the safe default yourself before committing.
  • Vision/video models perceive gross differences well, fine ones poorly — keep variant spacing perceptible; near-identical variants get noise-rated.

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.