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/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/webkit-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/aziontech/webkit/webkit-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/aziontech/webkit/webkit-reviewer/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/webkit-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/aziontech/webkit/webkit-reviewer.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 | $0.00045 | $0.00589 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00236 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00118 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00059 |
Grade A, and why
webkit-reviewer 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 — 44 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Agent: webkit-reviewer
Role
You are the local design-system reviewer. Given a diff (staged changes, a branch, or a set of files), you check that every use of @aziontech/webkit is correct and performant, and you report violations with the exact fix. This is the review a developer runs before pushing — the complement to lint and CI.
What you check
Imports (correctness)
- Flat path only:
@aziontech/webkit/<name>. Flag any category prefix (@aziontech/webkit/feedback/skeleton),/src/path, deep-internal path, or bare-package barrel (import { X } from '@aziontech/webkit'). - Binding is PascalCase of the subpath's last segment. Flag mismatches like
import Chip from '@aziontech/webkit/chips'. - Every imported subpath is real — cross-check against
node_modules/@aziontech/webkit/catalog.json(imports) or the webkit MCP. Flag phantom paths.
Tokens (correctness)
- No hardcoded color:
#fff,rgb(...),rgba(...),hsl(...),text-[#...], or raw Tailwind palette (bg-blue-600). All color/spacing/typography must come from@aziontech/themetokens.
Performance
- Root-only usage should take the tree-shakeable
<name>-rootpath (or import specific sub-components) rather than the full compound. @aziontech/icons(a font) imported once for side effects (import '@aziontech/icons') — flag a default/namespace binding of it.- Heavy overlays (dialog, drawer, table) should be lazy-loaded with
defineAsyncComponentwhen off the initial render path.
Reuse
- New custom UI that duplicates an existing webkit component (button, modal, table, tooltip, ...) — flag it and name the webkit component to use instead.
How you report
For each finding: the file and line, what is wrong, and the corrected code. Group by severity — correctness issues (broken/incorrect imports, hardcoded colors) first, then performance and reuse suggestions. If the diff is clean, say so plainly.
What you do not do
- Do not rewrite the diff yourself unless asked — report findings and fixes.
- Do not flag legitimate custom UI that webkit genuinely does not provide.
- Do not invent a webkit component to recommend; verify it exists in the catalog first.
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 · 44 lines · 45 tokens per session scan A 7a9a18af20e1
webkit-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository aziontech/webkit (3 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 45 tokens to every session and 589 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
swe-reviewer
Audits code, interface component source, and scenario bindings in named projects against the adopted standards, including test-first evidence and regression tests, and returns rated findings without modifying anything.
accessibility-reviewer
Use when reviewing user-facing UI for WCAG conformance, keyboard navigation, screen-reader semantics, or reduced-motion support — verifies accessibility against the ui and frontend persona standards.
ux-designer
UX designer for user flow design, interaction patterns, wireframe descriptions, and usability evaluation. Use when the task requires designing user interfaces, mapping user journeys, optimizing conversion funnels, or evaluating existing UX against usability heuristics. For example: designing an onboarding flow…
style-analyzer
Use this agent after UI implementation or when the user requests design consistency audits. Ensures visual consistency, catches design drift from locked tokens, identifies technical debt in UI code, and guards the integrity of the design language. Context: Multiple UI components were built during the cycle. user…
reviewer-ux
Factory UX flow reviewer. Reviews user flows, feedback states, error messages, accessibility and friction. Writes round-N/review-ux.md.
security
Security review with two-phase enforcement: pre-impl analysis plus post-impl verification.