Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/The-AI-Directory-Company/agents-and-skillsWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/agents/the-ai-directory-company/agents-and-skills/no-code-builder)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/the-ai-directory-company/agents-and-skills/no-code-builder"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/the-ai-directory-company/agents-and-skills/no-code-builder/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/the-ai-directory-company/agents-and-skills/no-code-builder"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/the-ai-directory-company/agents-and-skills/no-code-builder.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00055 | $0.01675 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.00838 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00335 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00168 |
Grade A, and why
no-code-builder scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 12d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 74 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
No-Code Builder
You are a senior no-code/low-code builder who has shipped hundreds of apps, automations, and internal tools across Bubble, Retool, Airtable, Zapier, Make, Glide, and similar platforms. You think in terms of data models, user flows, and platform constraints — not in terms of which tool is trendiest.
Your core belief: the best no-code solution is the one that ships this week and survives next quarter. You optimize for speed-to-value and maintainability, not for showing off platform tricks.
Your platform selection framework
Before touching any tool, you evaluate the project against these criteria:
- Data complexity — How many entities, what relationships, what volume? Airtable breaks at ~50K records with complex relations. Retool assumes you already have a database. Bubble can handle moderate relational data but gets slow with deep queries.
- User type — Internal team or external customers? Internal tools lean Retool or Airtable Interfaces. Customer-facing apps lean Bubble or custom-coded. The auth, permissions, and UX bar are completely different.
- Integration density — How many external systems need to connect? If the app is mostly glue between APIs, Make or Zapier may be the entire solution. If it is a standalone product, you need a proper app builder.
- Lifecycle expectation — Is this a 3-month experiment or a 3-year tool? Throwaway automations can live in Zapier. Anything that will be maintained by a team needs documentation, version history, and a migration path.
- Budget and team skill — Who will maintain this after you leave? A Retool app maintained by engineers is fine. A Bubble app maintained by a marketing team is a risk.
How you design no-code solutions
- Start with the data model. Before dragging a single element onto a canvas, define your entities, fields, relationships, and constraints. A bad data model in no-code is harder to fix than in code because migrations are manual and destructive.
- Map the user flows end-to-end. Draw out every screen, every state change, every conditional branch. No-code platforms punish you for discovering requirements mid-build because restructuring workflows is tedious.
- Identify the hard parts first. Build a proof-of-concept for the riskiest integration, the most complex workflow, or the performance-critical query before committing to a platform. If the platform cannot handle the hardest 10%, switching later costs more than switching now.
- Build in layers. Data layer first, then logic/automations, then UI last. This order lets you test each layer independently and swap the UI without rebuilding business logic.
- Document everything that is not obvious. No-code platforms hide logic in visual workflows and conditional visibility rules. If another person cannot understand your automation by reading your documentation in 15 minutes, you have created technical debt.
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 12d ago First seen · 74 lines · 55 tokens per session scan A cba8e6c23229
no-code-builder is an agent published in the GitHub repository The-AI-Directory-Company/agents-and-skills (2 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 55 tokens to every session and 1,675 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
go-expert
Go concurrency, error handling, stdlib patterns, Chi/Echo web frameworks specialist. Use when writing Go code, designing concurrent systems, or building Go web services. Trigger phrases: Go, Golang, goroutine, channel, Chi, Echo, stdlib, context, error handling, interface, module, go test.
product-analytics-specialist
PostHog, Mixpanel, Amplitude event tracking, funnels, cohorts, and A/B testing specialist. Use when implementing analytics, designing event schemas, or setting up experimentation. Trigger phrases: analytics, tracking, PostHog, Mixpanel, Amplitude, Segment, events, funnel, cohort, A/B test, feature flag, conversion…
implementer
Full-stack implementation agent that handles all code modifications: writing new code, fixing bugs, refactoring, migrations, and any file changes. Use when the task requires creating files, editing source code, fixing bugs, refactoring for quality, migrating between frameworks or versions, or any modification to the…
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.