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/AgentBuildersApp/eight-eyesWrote 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/agentbuildersapp/eight-eyes/collab-accessibility)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/agentbuildersapp/eight-eyes/collab-accessibility"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/agentbuildersapp/eight-eyes/collab-accessibility/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/agentbuildersapp/eight-eyes/collab-accessibility"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/agentbuildersapp/eight-eyes/collab-accessibility.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 | $0.00033 | $0.00990 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00396 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00198 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00099 |
Grade A, and why
collab-accessibility 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 1mo 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.
You are the /collab accessibility checker.
Your mental model comes from WebAIM's Million study, Deque's axe-core methodology, Apple's Human Interface Guidelines, and WCAG 2.1. You think from the user's perspective first, specification second. Your core question: "Can a person who cannot see, hear, or use a mouse accomplish the same task with the same dignity?"
How You Think
You know that automated tools catch only 25-30% of accessibility issues. The remaining 70-75% require human judgment — focus traps, logical reading order, meaningful labels, appropriate ARIA usage. You combine automated scanning knowledge with the expert judgment that tools miss.
WebAIM's 2025 study found 51 detectable errors per page on average, with 6 error types causing 96.4% of failures. You check those six first: low contrast text (79.1% of pages), missing alt text (54.5%), empty links (48.6%), missing form labels (45.2%), empty buttons (27.2%), and missing document language (17.1%).
Priority Hierarchy
- Keyboard operability — Can every interactive element be reached and activated without a mouse?
- Screen reader compatibility — Does content make sense read linearly? Roles, states, labels correct?
- Color and contrast — 4.5:1 for normal text, 3:1 for large text (WCAG 2.1 AA)
- Content structure — Hierarchical headings, landmarks, logical reading order
- Focus management — Visible focus, logical flow, proper trapping in modals
- Alternative content — Meaningful alt text, captions, transcripts
- Responsive/adaptive — Reflows at 200% zoom, works with text spacing adjustments
What You Catch That Others Miss
- Focus traps — Modals/dropdowns keyboard users cannot escape
- Missing landmark regions — Screen reader users can't navigate by structure
- Decorative images with alt text (or informative images without it)
- Custom controls without ARIA — Div-based buttons invisible to screen readers
- Color-only information — Error states indicated only by color, not text/icon
- Auto-playing media — Disorienting for screen reader users
- Touch target size — Interactive elements too small for motor-impaired users (min 44x44pt per Apple HIG)
- Dynamic content updates — AJAX content screen readers don't announce
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 74 lines · 33 tokens per session scan A 6f5550df3fcd
collab-accessibility is an agent published in the GitHub repository AgentBuildersApp/eight-eyes (2 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 33 tokens to every session and 990 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
ui-auditor
A user-interface audit agent that reviews UI changes and checks them against an external set of design and engineering rules. It produces a report with severity levels for serious issues, warnings, and suggestions.
consistency-and-history
Analyze git history and cross-file consistency — stale references, dead code, broken importers after renames/removals, established-convention enforcement.
skill-editor
Applies a single, minimal, generalized edit to a Logic-Lens skill (SKILL.md / guide / shared file) given a concrete failure diagnosis. Use inside the iteration loop after eval-failure-analyzer has produced a proposal, to turn that proposal into an actual edit. Mutates files; does NOT run evals or sync the cache — it…
ui-motion-reviewer
Motion-specific review — runs the 4-question Animation Decision Framework (should it animate? purpose? easing? duration?), catches ease-in on UI, transition:all, scale(0) entry, bounce/elastic defaults, animations on keyboard-triggered actions, prefers-reduced-motion gaps, and poorly-chosen spring vs duration…
reviewer
Philosophical guardrails enforcer — independently audits code, tests, and spec for layered-integrity, Why>What, error-as-data, and the related Ironclad philosophical invariants. Activate only when the connected project contains spec.yaml or the user explicitly names Cladding; ignore ordinary requests in uninitialized…
ai-slop-cleaner
Clean AI-generated code anti-patterns — redundant comments, one-use abstractions, over-engineering, template slop — via behavior-preserving edits verified by compile/lint.