Check dependencies BEFORE blaming code. Core principle 80% of persistent build failures are dependency resolution issues (CocoaPods, SPM, framework conflicts), not code bugs.
Works with
AI-first code editor with Composer
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
node --versionaxiom-build-debuggingExecute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
Fetches axiom-build-debugging from charleswiltgen/axiom and configures it for Cursor.
The CLI shows a list of agents. Use arrow keys and space to select Cursor:
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Restart Cursor to activate axiom-build-debugging. Access via /axiom-build-debugging in your agent's command palette.
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your environment. Always review source, verify the publisher, and test in isolation before production.
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Automate repetitive workflows and reduce manual effort
Example
Generate reports, summarize documents, draft communications
Save 3-5 hours per week on routine tasks
Learn new skills, understand complex topics, get expert guidance
Example
Explain concepts, provide examples, suggest learning resources
Accelerate learning and skill development by 2x
Enhance output quality through reviews, suggestions, and refinements
Example
Review drafts, suggest improvements, catch errors
Improve work quality by 30-40% with less effort
0
total installs
0
this week
767
GitHub stars
0
upvotes
Run in your terminal
0
installs
0
this week
767
stars
Check dependencies BEFORE blaming code. Core principle 80% of persistent build failures are dependency resolution issues (CocoaPods, SPM, framework conflicts), not code bugs.
These are real questions developers ask that this skill is designed to answer:
→ The skill covers SPM resolution workflows, package cache clearing, and framework search path diagnostics
→ The skill shows how to identify duplicate target membership and resolve file conflicts in build settings
→ The skill covers Podfile.lock conflict resolution, linking errors, and version constraint debugging
→ The skill explains dependency caching differences, environment-specific paths, and reproducible build strategies
→ The skill demonstrates dependency graph analysis and version constraint resolution strategies for complex dependency trees
If you see ANY of these, suspect dependency problem:
Build failing?
├─ "No such module XYZ"?
│ ├─ After adding SPM package?
│ │ └─ Clean build folder + reset package caches
│ ├─ After pod install?
│ │ └─ Check Podfile.lock conflicts
│ └─ Framework not found?
│ └─ Check FRAMEWORK_SEARCH_PATHS
├─ "Multiple commands produce"?
│ └─ Duplicate files in target membership
├─ SPM resolution hangs?
│ └─ Clear package caches + derived data
└─ Version conflicts?
└─ Use dependency resolution strategies below
Symptom: "No such module PackageName" after adding Swift Package
❌ WRONG:
# Rebuilding without cleaning
xcodebuild build
✅ CORRECT:
# Reset package caches first
rm -rf ~/Library/Developer/Xcode/DerivedData
rm -rf ~/Library/Caches/org.swift.swiftpm
# Reset packages in project
xcodebuild -resolvePackageDependencies
# Clean build
xcodebuild clean build -scheme YourScheme
Symptom: Pod install succeeds but build fails with framework errors
Check Podfile.lock:
# See what versions were actually installed
cat Podfile.lock | grep -A 2 "PODS:"
# Compare with Podfile requirements
cat Podfile | grep "pod "
Fix version conflicts:
# Podfile - be explicit about versions
pod 'Alamofire', '~> 5.8.0' # Not just 'Alamofire'
pod 'SwiftyJSON', '5.0.1' # Exact version if needed
Clean reinstall:
# Remove all pods
rm -rf Pods/
rm Podfile.lock
# Reinstall
pod install
# Open workspace (not project!)
open YourApp.xcworkspace
Symptom: "Multiple commands produce '/path/to/file'"
Cause: Same file added to multiple targets or build phases
Fix:
Symptom: "Framework not found" or "Linker command failed"
Check build settings:
# Show all build settings
xcodebuild -showBuildSettings -scheme YourScheme | grep FRAMEWORK_SEARCH_PATHS
Fix in Xcode:
$(PROJECT_DIR)/Frameworks (recursive)$(inherited) to inherit from projectSymptom: Package resolution fails with version conflicts
See dependency graph:
# In project directory
swift package show-dependencies
# Or see resolved versions
cat Package.resolved
Fix conflicts:
// Package.swift - be explicit
.package(url: "https://github.com/owner/repo", exact: "1.2.3") // Exact version
.package(url: "https://github.com/owner/repo", from: "1.2.0") // Minimum version
.package(url: "https://github.com/owner/repo", .upToNextMajor(from: "1.0.0")) // SemVer
Reset resolution:
# Clear package caches
rm -rf .build
rm Package.resolved
# Re-resolve
swift package resolve
When stability matters more than latest features:
CocoaPods:
pod 'Alamofire', '5.8.0' # Exact version
pod 'SwiftyJSON', '~> 5.0.0' # Any 5.0.x
SPM:
.package(url: "...", exact: "1.2.3")
When you want bug fixes but not breaking changes:
CocoaPods:
pod 'Alamofire', '~> 5.8' # 5.8.x but not 5.9
pod 'SwiftyJSON', '>= 5.0', '< 6.0' # Range
SPM:
.package(url: "...", from: "1.2.0") // 1.2.0 and higher
.package(url: "...", .upToNextMajor(from: "1.0.0")) // 1.x.x but not 2.0.0
When you need custom modifications:
# Fork repo on GitHub
# Clone your fork
git clone https://github.com/yourname/package.git
# In Package.swift, use your fork
.package(url: "https://github.com/yourname/package", branch: "custom-fixes")
When a dependency's dependency conflicts:
SPM (not directly supported, use workarounds):
// Instead of this:
.package(url: "https://github.com/problematic/package")
// Fork it and remove the conflicting dependency from its Package.swift
CocoaPods:
# Exclude specific subspecs
pod 'Firebase/Core' # Not all of Firebase
pod 'Firebase/Analytics'
Symptom: Builds in Debug, fails in Release (or vice versa)
Check optimization settings:
# Compare Debug and Release settings
xcodebuild -showBuildSettings -configuration Debug > debug.txt
xcodebuild -showBuildSettings -configuration Release > release.txt
diff debug.txt release.txt
Common culprits:
Always open workspace with CocoaPods:
# ❌ WRONG
open YourApp.xcodeproj
# ✅ CORRECT
open YourApp.xcworkspace
Check which you're building:
# For workspace
xcodebuild -workspace YourApp.xcworkspace -scheme YourScheme build
# For project only (no CocoaPods)
xcodebuild -project YourApp.xcodeproj -scheme YourScheme build
Under deadline pressure, senior engineers and teammates provide "quick fixes" based on pattern-matching:
These feel safe because they come from experience. But if the diagnosis is wrong, the fix wastes time you don't have.
Critical insight Time pressure makes authority bias STRONGER. You're more likely to trust advice when stressed.
If you hear ANY of these, pause 5 minutes before executing:
Your brain under pressure Trusts these phrases because they sound confident. Doesn't ask "but do they have evidence THIS is the root cause?"
When someone senior suggests a fix under time pressure:
"I understand the pressure. Before we regenerate lock files,
can we spend 5 minutes comparing the broken build to our
working build? I want to know what we're fixing."
If we try "pod install":
- Time to execute: 10 minutes
- Time to learn it failed: 24 hours (next submission cycle)
- Remaining time if it fails: 6 days
- Alternative: Spend 1-2 hours diagnosing first
Cost of being wrong with quick fix: High
Cost of spending 1 hour on diagnosis: Low
"I want to move fast too. A 1-hour diagnosis now means we
won't waste another 24-hour cycle. Let's document what we're
testing before we submit."
Scenario App rejected in App Store build, passes locally.
Senior says "Regenerate lock file and resubmit (7 days buffer)"
Implementation Guide
Prerequisites
- ›Claude Desktop or compatible AI client with skill support
- ›Clear understanding of task or problem to solve
- ›Willingness to iterate and refine outputs
Time Estimate
15-45 minutes depending on use case complexity
Steps
- 1Install skill using provided installation command
- 2Test with simple use case relevant to your work
- 3Evaluate output quality and relevance
- 4Iterate on prompts to improve results
- 5Integrate into regular workflow if valuable
Common Pitfalls
- ⚠Expecting perfect results without iteration
- ⚠Not providing enough context in prompts
- ⚠Using skill for tasks outside its intended scope
- ⚠Accepting outputs without review and validation
Best Practices
✓ Do
- +Start with clear, specific prompts
- +Provide relevant context and constraints
- +Review and refine all outputs before using
- +Iterate to improve output quality
- +Document successful prompt patterns
✗ Don't
- −Don't use without understanding skill limitations
- −Don't skip validation of outputs
- −Don't share sensitive information in prompts
- −Don't expect skill to replace human judgment
💡 Pro Tips
- ★Be specific about desired format and style
- ★Ask for multiple options to choose from
- ★Request explanations to understand reasoning
- ★Combine AI efficiency with human expertise
When to Use This
✓ Use when
Use when skill capabilities match your task, clear ROI on time saved, and you can validate outputs. Best for repetitive tasks, learning, and quality improvement.
✗ Avoid when
Avoid when task requires deep expertise you can't validate, involves sensitive decisions, or when learning process is more valuable than speed of completion.
Learning Path
- 1Familiarize yourself with skill capabilities and limitations
- 2Start with low-risk, non-critical tasks
- 3Progress to more complex and valuable use cases
- 4Build expertise through regular use and experimentation
Related Skills
frontend-design
662anthropics/claude-code
Frontendsame categoryui-animation
242mblode/agent-skills
Frontendsame categorypremium-frontend-ui
236github/awesome-copilot
Frontendsame categoryantigravity-design-expert
209sickn33/antigravity-awesome-skills
Frontendsame categoryhigh-end-visual-design
193leonxlnx/taste-skill
Frontendsame categoryinterior-design-expert
145erichowens/some_claude_skills
Frontendsame categoryReviews
4.8★★★★★61 reviews- HHassan Brown★★★★★Dec 28, 2024
Registry listing for axiom-build-debugging matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
- KKiara Menon★★★★★Dec 24, 2024
We added axiom-build-debugging from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
- VValentina Perez★★★★★Dec 20, 2024
Keeps context tight: axiom-build-debugging is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
- MMaya Jackson★★★★★Dec 20, 2024
Useful defaults in axiom-build-debugging — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
- KKiara Sethi★★★★★Dec 8, 2024
axiom-build-debugging is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
- CChaitanya Patil★★★★★Dec 4, 2024
axiom-build-debugging fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
- KKaira Thomas★★★★★Nov 27, 2024
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: axiom-build-debugging is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
- PPiyush G★★★★★Nov 23, 2024
Registry listing for axiom-build-debugging matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
- MMaya White★★★★★Nov 19, 2024
I recommend axiom-build-debugging for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
- AAisha Chen★★★★★Nov 19, 2024
axiom-build-debugging fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
showing 1-10 of 61
1 / 7Discussion
Comments — not star reviews- No comments yet — start the thread.