agentleFS
RuneStone-TechRuneStone-Tech/optimize-anything/skills/styles/pandacss/SKILL.md

pandacss-optimizer

Skill1 starsChanged 8 days agoMITView on GitHub

Audit and optimize Panda CSS 2.5 usage for missing presets, panda.config and styled-system codegen drift, broad static CSS, runtime css() calls, recipe/token consistency, source transforms, CSS layers, design-system packages and v1-to-v2 migration, with real before/after measurement. Always produces a written findings report and a fix plan for approval before touching code. Use this whenever the user mentions Panda CSS, @pandacss/dev, panda.config, styled-system, Panda recipes/tokens, or "optimize my Panda CSS" -- even if they never say audit or optimize.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

5 rules. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈1

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 4

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    Run python <skill-dir>/scripts/audit.py <project-root> -- static scan of package.json, config/CSS files and source for version drift, …

    line 15
  2. Very specific:

    Read references/tooling.md once: what can be measured here.

    line 17
  3. Very specific:

    Check panda.config, the styled-system output, presets (@pandacss/preset-base/preset-panda are required in v2), and whether source …

    line 19
  4. Very specific:

    Use plan mode: EnterPlanMode (load with ToolSearch if deferred), write the plan, present with ExitPlanMode.

    line 41
  5. Distinctive:

    Extraction is the product: Keep usage static.

    line 58

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Panda CSS Optimizer

Panda CSS 2 compiles a Rust engine to atomic CSS at build time. Cost is generated styled-system size, broad staticCss, runtime css() on dense pages, and config/preset drift in v2. Optimize extraction, recipes and layers rather than runtime CSS.

Workflow

1. Scope (quick)

  • Find the app root and detect Panda CSS usage: @pandacss/dev 2.x. Record the version, framework (React/Next/Vue/Svelte/Solid/Angular or HTML), styling system, and whether the library is a package, a CSS-only kit, or copied source.
  • Run python <skill-dir>/scripts/audit.py <project-root> -- static scan of package.json, config/CSS files and source for version drift, missing presets, codegen/styled-system drift, broad static CSS, runtime css() calls and v1-to-v2 migration, with file:line evidence. Use --json to post-process.
  • Classify the pain: bundle/import cost, runtime/re-render cost, theming/SSR style flash, accessibility/forms, large tables/lists, or migration/upgrade. Ask which hurts if unclear.
  • Read references/tooling.md once: what can be measured here.
  • Check panda.config, the styled-system output, presets (@pandacss/preset-base/preset-panda are required in v2), and whether source transforms are enabled.

2. Audit

The script finds cheap leads; you find the rest by reading. Read the install/config, the global CSS/theme file, the provider or plugin setup, and the 3-5 most-used components. Load only what applies:

AreaReference
Install, config, provider/plugin, theming, SSRreferences/setup.md
Bundle/imports, runtime, a11y/forms, tables, upgradesreferences/optimizations.md
Measurement and honest reportingreferences/tooling.md

Measure, never guess. Build for production and measure the real route/bundle. Inspect SSR HTML for style tags and dark-mode flash; run axe/Playwright on dialogs, menus, forms and tables. Component count, bundle bytes and a11y violations are evidence; "feels heavy" is not.

Mark each finding Confirmed (build/analyzer/axe/code evidence) or Suspected (needs measuring).

3. Report

Fill assets/report-template.md, save it as PANDA_CSS_OPTIMIZATION_REPORT.md in the project root, and show the user. Five-line summary, findings table by impact/effort, then per-finding detail (evidence, why it hurts, fix, risk, visual/behavior impact). Group near-duplicates.

4. Plan -- then stop for approval

Use plan mode: EnterPlanMode (load with ToolSearch if deferred), write the plan, present with ExitPlanMode; if unavailable show it in chat and wait for an explicit "go". Structure:

  1. Quick wins -- trim imports, use path imports, add provider/plugin correctly, add missing labels/titles, move heavy components off the initial route, remove per-row overlays, align theme tokens, add SSR style/cache setup. Low risk.
  2. Structural -- split component boundaries, virtualize tables, lazy-load heavy widgets, consolidate theming, migrate variants/tokens, fix form composition, deduplicate copied components. Name each behavior change.
  3. Heavy -- major upgrade, primitive-base change, CSS-only to styled kit (or reverse), Tailwind 3 to 4, copy-in registry extraction, SSR architecture. Separately approved. Each step: files touched, expected effect, how to verify, how to roll back.

5. Fix

Only approved items, in small groups. After each: typecheck, lint, tests, production build, and a visual/axe check on affected components. A break must trace to one change. Do not mix a major migration with optimization edits. If a change alters a public component API, theme tokens or SSR behavior, stop and ask.

6. Verify and wrap up

Re-measure the same routes/components: route JS/CSS, SSR styles/theme, axe violations, dialog/form keyboard flow, table interaction. State plainly what could not be measured. End with deferred items and one suggested next step.

Principles

  • Extraction is the product. Keep usage static.
  • Presets are required in v2.
  • Codegen is part of the build.

Docs

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.