Reduce plugin capability name size

[brsbl]

Summary

• reduce capability names using the established text-xs typography token
• keep scheduled jobs and other shared detail-row consumers unchanged
• add focused regression coverage for capability name styling

Verification

• pnpm exec turbo run test --filter=@bb/app -- --run src/components/tools/detail-page-recipes.test.tsx (38 passed)
• pnpm exec turbo run typecheck --filter=@bb/app
• git diff --check
• visually verified Automations and Workflows plugin details in the branch dev app, including proportional, monospace, and long-description capability rows

Stack

Layer 2. Base: bb/skill-detail-pagination-thr_cxz5rwzns3 (PR #991).

[SawyerHood]

🚨 SLOP COP 🚨 · review

I am SlopCop. I am reviewing this pull request now.

The stack contains #992, #993, #994, #995, #996, #997, #1000, and #1001, from bottom to top.

I will review security, code quality, performance, architecture, and tests. I will run the end-to-end test on #1001.

[SawyerHood]

🚨 SLOP COP 🚨 · review

I am SlopCop. I am reviewing this stack under the review rule.

The stack contains these pull requests, from bottom to top:

• Paginate skill detail content #991: Paginate skill detail content
• Reduce plugin capability name size #992: Reduce plugin capability name size
• Align plugin browse cards and filters #993: Align plugin browse cards and filters
• Unify plugin browse action buttons #994: Unify plugin browse action buttons
• Center plugin capability icons #995: Center plugin capability icons
• Emphasize plugin release labels #996: Emphasize plugin release labels
• Compact automation filter menus #997: Compact automation filter menus
• Unify Docs right-panel navigation #1000: Unify Docs right-panel navigation
• Restore Skills Type filter terminology #1001: Restore Skills Type filter terminology

I will run security, code quality and architecture, performance, and one end-to-end phase on top PR #1001.

I skipped no pull requests.

[SawyerHood]

🚨 SLOP COP 🚨 · review

Security phase complete.

I found no security issue in this PR after I reviewed the complete stack.

The changes do not add a trust-boundary change, unsafe render sink, data exposure, dependency risk, or protocol change.

[SawyerHood]

🚨 SLOP COP 🚨 · review

Review complete.

I found no issues in this pull request after the complete stack lands.

The security, code-quality, architecture, performance, and final review phases found no issue here.

I used a comment-only review. I did not approve or request changes.

[SawyerHood]

🚨 SLOP COP 🚨 · review

Performance phase complete.

I found no material performance issue in this PR after I reviewed the complete stack.

The render scope, allocations, bundle inputs, and pagination behavior stay stable.

[SawyerHood]

🚨 SLOP COP 🚨 · review

Code-quality and architecture phase complete.

I found no actionable code-quality or architecture issue in this PR.

I checked the full stack and checked later PRs before I reported each issue.

[SawyerHood]

🚨 SLOP COP 🚨 · review

Review result: no finding.

• Security review found no issue.
• Performance review found no material render, allocation, bundle, or pagination issue.
• Turbo type checks passed for the app, shared UI, Automations, and Docs packages.
• The affected tests passed after clean reruns. The latest Docs suite passed all 57 tests.

The browser test covered the full stack on the top PR.