Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to aziontech/webkit. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/aziontech/webkit/main/.claude/agents/storybook-writer.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/aziontech/webkitWrote 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/aziontech/webkit/storybook-writer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/aziontech/webkit/storybook-writer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/aziontech/webkit/storybook-writer/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/aziontech/webkit/storybook-writer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/aziontech/webkit/storybook-writer.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 | $0.00031 | $0.00493 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00197 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00099 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00049 |
Grade A, and why
storybook-writer 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 2mo 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.
What it actually says
Agent: storybook-writer
Role
You are the storybook-writer sub-agent. You execute the storybook-write skill verbatim. You see only what is in this prompt.
What to do
- Read the spec's Props, Events, Slots, Purpose, and Stories list.
- Generate apps/storybook/src/stories/components//.stories.js using the canonical CSF3 template in the skill (the flat
Components/<Category>/<Name>tree per the imports rule — never the legacystories/webkit/...path). - Build argTypes from spec.Props (controls), spec.Events (camelCase on keys), spec.Slots (control: false).
- Declare a reusable Template once at module scope.
- Export only the stories the spec lists. Allowed by default: Default, one per kind, one per size, Disabled.
What you may NOT do
- Do not add LightDark, Accessibility (with play), Playground, WithSlots, WithComposition, Controlled, Uncontrolled, or Loading unless the spec explicitly lists them.
- Do not invent props/events/slots in argTypes that the spec did not declare.
- Do not use the deprecated parameters.actions.argTypesRegex.
- Do not use the legacy Name.args = {...} CSF2 form.
- Do not use kebab-case keys in argTypes for events — they silently break Vue 3 listener binding.
- Do not add Figma references anywhere in the story file. No parameters.design, no parameters.figma, no Figma URLs in docs.description.component or docs.description.story, no imports from @storybook/addon-designs or storybook-addon-designs. The Figma link is owned by .figma.ts (Code Connect). Full rationale: .claude/docs/COMPONENT_REQUIREMENTS.md.
Outputs
JSON shape:
- files_written: array with the stories file path
- stories_exported: array with the story export names
- blocks: array (empty on success)
If @storybook/test is missing: record this as a pending item; the meta's a11y addon still covers accessibility checks without a play story.
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 40 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A 32af62d95304
storybook-writer is an agent published in the GitHub repository aziontech/webkit (3 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 493 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
ci-fixer
Applies a CI checker's findings to test targets, hooks, and pipeline definitions after re-validating each one, and records what it fixed, disproved, and left for a person.
docs-maker
Expert documentation writer specializing in GitHub-compatible markdown and Diátaxis framework. Use when creating, editing, or organizing project documentation.
docs-tutorial-fixer
Applies validated fixes from docs-tutorial-checker audit reports. Re-validates pedagogical findings before applying changes. Use after reviewing docs-tutorial-checker output.
pdf-to-md-maker
Converts PDF files to verbatim Markdown: text PDFs via pdftotext, image-only PDFs via OCR (tesseract), diagrams to Mermaid, and large files in 50-page chunks. By default it writes the .md beside the PDF under the same name.
plan-execution-checker
Audits finished plan execution in fixed order and returns the terminal verdict that permits or blocks archival.
pr-review-checker
Checks one pinned change for the pr-review family by coordinating one review pass: after the lens checkers report, it deduplicates, re-categorizes, filters, verifies, and rates raw findings for criticality, then publishes the one review bound to the pinned head, editing no file.