compare-builds
Skill0 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub
Compares two Xcode build runs to identify duration regressions, cache changes, and new issues. Can be invoked with build IDs, dashboard URLs, or branch names (e.g. `tuist compare-builds --base main --head feature-branch`).
2 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Steady: 0 new projects took it in the last 4 weeks, none the 4 weeks before.thin data
Most recently taken up by
- tuist/tuistword for word, first seen Oct 8, 2026
- tuist/agent-skillsword for word, first seen Mar 27, 2026
Other versions2 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 2
- tuist/tuist★ 5.9k100% same
- tuist/agent-skills★ 35100% same
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 0
None found.
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository11 other files it gives its agents.
- analyze-selective-testingSkill
- compare-bundlesSkill
- compare-cache-runsSkill
- compare-generationsSkill
- compare-gradle-buildsSkill
- compare-test-caseSkill
- compare-test-runsSkill
- debug-generated-projectSkill
- fix-flaky-testsSkill
- generated-projectsSkill
- migrateSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
13 rules. About 0 are common, 9 are distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈9
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
- Very specific: line 12
Run tuist build list --json to find builds on each branch.
- Very specific: line 13
Run tuist build show <build-id> --json for both base and head builds.
- Distinctive: line 18
If only one identifier is provided, use the project's default branch as the baseline.
- Distinctive: line 44
If no base is provided, use the project's default branch (usually main).
- Distinctive: line 45
If no head is provided, detect the current git branch with git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD.
- Very specific: line 49
After fetching both builds with tuist build show <id> --json, drill down into sub-resources for a deeper comparison.
- Distinctive: line 58
Look for targets that changed status (e.g., success to failure) or had significant duration changes.
- Distinctive: line 67
Look for new warnings or errors introduced in the head build.
- Distinctive: line 80
After fetching both builds, compare:
- Distinctive: line 97
If the head build is significantly slower:
- Very specific: line 99
Check if the category differs (clean vs incremental builds are not directly comparable).
- Distinctive: line 100
Check if cache hit rate dropped, which would explain longer builds.
- Distinctive: line 101
If both are incremental with similar cache rates, the regression is likely in compilation time.
≈ “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.
Files
Compare Builds
Quick Start
You'll typically receive two build identifiers (IDs, dashboard URLs, or branch names). Follow these steps:
- Run
tuist build list --jsonto find builds on each branch. - Run
tuist build show <build-id> --jsonfor both base and head builds. - Fetch sub-resource details: targets (
tuist build xcode target list <id> --json), issues (tuist build xcode issue list <id> --json), and cache tasks (tuist build xcode cache-task list <id> --json). - Compare duration, status, cache hit rates, and other metrics.
- Summarize regressions, improvements, and recommendations.
If only one identifier is provided, use the project's default branch as the baseline.
Step 1: Resolve Builds
If base/head are build IDs or dashboard URLs
Fetch each directly:
tuist build show <base-id> --json
tuist build show <head-id> --jsonIf base/head are branch names
List recent builds on each branch and pick the latest:
tuist build list --git-branch <base-branch> --json --page-size 1
tuist build list --git-branch <head-branch> --json --page-size 1Then fetch full details with tuist build show <id> --json.
Defaults
- If no base is provided, use the project's default branch (usually
main). - If no head is provided, detect the current git branch with
git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD.
Step 2: Fetch Sub-Resource Details
After fetching both builds with tuist build show <id> --json, drill down into sub-resources for a deeper comparison.
Compare targets
tuist build xcode target list <base-id> --json
tuist build xcode target list <head-id> --jsonLook for targets that changed status (e.g., success to failure) or had significant duration changes.
Compare issues
tuist build xcode issue list <base-id> --json
tuist build xcode issue list <head-id> --jsonLook for new warnings or errors introduced in the head build.
Compare cache tasks
tuist build xcode cache-task list <base-id> --json
tuist build xcode cache-task list <head-id> --jsonIdentify which specific targets had cache misses or hits and whether that changed between builds.
Step 3: Compare Top-Level Metrics
After fetching both builds, compare:
| Metric | What to check |
duration | Flag if head is >10% slower than base |
status | Flag if base succeeded but head failed |
cacheable_tasks_count | Note if task count changed |
cacheable_task_local_hits_count | Compare local hit counts |
cacheable_task_remote_hits_count | Compare remote hit counts |
| Cache hit rate | (local_hits + remote_hits) / cacheable_tasks_count * 100 |
category | Note if one is clean and the other incremental (makes duration comparison less meaningful) |
scheme / configuration | Ensure both builds used the same scheme and configuration for a fair comparison |
Compute the cache miss delta: base_misses - head_misses. Positive means head has fewer misses (improvement). Negative means regression.
Step 4: Investigate Duration Regressions
If the head build is significantly slower:
- Check if the
categorydiffers (clean vs incremental builds are not directly comparable). - Check if cache hit rate dropped, which would explain longer builds.
- If both are incremental with similar cache rates, the regression is likely in compilation time.
Step 5: Investigate Cache Changes
Compare cache statistics:
- Hit rate dropped: Possible causes include dependency changes, build setting changes, or Xcode version updates.
- Hit rate improved: Likely due to better cache warming or fewer source changes.
- Task count changed: New targets added or removed.
Step 6: Check Build Context
Compare environment details:
xcode_versionandmacos_version: Different versions can affect build times and cache validity.is_ci: CI vs local builds may have different performance characteristics.git_branchandgit_commit_sha: Verify the builds are from the expected commits.
Summary Format
Produce a summary with:
- Overall verdict: Better, worse, or neutral compared to base.
- Duration: Absolute and percentage change.
- Cache hit rate: Change in hit rate with explanation.
- Status: Any status changes (pass to fail or vice versa).
- Environment: Note any environment differences that affect comparability.
- Recommendations: Actionable next steps based on findings.
Example:
Build Comparison: base (abc123 on main) vs head (def456 on feature-x)
Duration: 45.2s -> 62.8s (+39%) -- REGRESSION
Cache hit rate: 85% -> 72% (-13%) -- 8 new cache misses
Status: success -> success
Root cause: Cache hit rate dropped due to 8 targets with invalidated caches.
The dependency hash changed for FeatureModule, cascading to 7 downstream targets.
Recommendations:
- Investigate why FeatureModule's cache was invalidated
- Consider splitting large targets to reduce cascade impactDone Checklist
- Resolved both base and head builds
- Fetched sub-resource details (targets, issues, cache tasks)
- Compared duration, cache, and status metrics
- Identified root causes for any regressions
- Provided actionable recommendations
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
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.

