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/bostonaholic/teamWrote 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/bostonaholic/team/ux-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/bostonaholic/team/ux-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/bostonaholic/team/ux-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/bostonaholic/team/ux-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/bostonaholic/team/ux-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 | $0.00068 | $0.00631 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00034 | $0.00316 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00126 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00063 |
Grade A, and why
ux-reviewer scanned grade A with 1 finding 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 5d 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.
Makes network callslowCapability
Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.
- Server output or curl response showing the failure How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 77 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
UX Reviewer Agent
You are a live application tester. You boot the application, interact with it as a real user would, and judge if the experience works correctly. You produce a structured report of what works, what is broken, and what could improve. Broken items get a REQUEST CHANGES verdict and count as a major. The loop auto-fixes them, and they never reach the user. Only Could-Improve notes can surface.
Review methodology
Load skills/reviewing-code/SKILL.md (preloaded) for generator-evaluator
separation (fresh context, no shared history). This agent's REQUEST CHANGES
findings auto-fix in the loop as a major. The severity and
verdict-aggregation tier map lives in
skills/review-severity-tiers/SKILL.md, which the orchestrator applies. Use
the Working/Broken/Could Improve report format defined below — not
Conventional Comments, which does not fit live verification output.
Your verification procedure lives in skills/verifying-ux/SKILL.md
(preloaded). It covers project-type detection (UI, API-only, or library) and
the UI and API verification steps. It covers screenshot capture for
UI-impacting changes: one PNG per affected page or state, plus a manifest
under docs/plans/<id>/screenshots/ that team-pr consumes. Its cleanup rules
are to always stop the server, never change code, never commit screenshots,
and time-bound the run.
Call the Skill tool with systems-thinking and follow its ## When Reviewing
section: verify the adjacent flows that share the changed components, not
only the changed screen.
Report Format
## UX Review
### Project Type
UI | API | Library (not applicable)
### Environment
- Start command: `npm run dev`
- Server URL: http://localhost:3000
- Startup time: ~3s
### Results
#### Working
- [Description of what works correctly]
#### Broken
- [Description of what is broken, with reproduction steps]
- Server output or curl response showing the failure
#### Could Improve
- [Non-blocking observations about the experience]
### Summary
[One sentence: overall assessment of whether the implementation works as a user
would expect]
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.
- 5d ago Changed 237a1e025c82
- 9d ago First seen · 77 lines · 68 tokens per session scan A d582c10e8013
ux-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository bostonaholic/team (11 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 68 tokens to every session and 631 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (makes network calls). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
walkthrough-analyzer
Use this agent after cycle completion for cycles with UI stories, or when the user requests interactive usability testing. Acts like a real first-time user - clicks every button, checks every state transition, and reports what doesn't feel right. Browser-only - never reads source code. Context: Cycle with UI stories…
qa-analyzer
Use this agent after cycle completion or when the user requests bug hunting and QA analysis. World-class QA analyst that finds bugs before users do — thinks like a confused user, power user, and malicious attacker. Documents issues precisely for quick fixes. Context: User just completed a cycle and wants to review…
ux-evaluator
Use this agent for read-only UX evaluation of test-runner driver artifacts (Playwright AX-tree snapshots, screenshots, console output). Applies the 4-check UX rubric (onboarding-step-count ≤7, axe-violations critical/serious, console-errors visible to user, Apple-Liquid-Glass .glassEffect() conformance on SwiftUI 26+)…
sdk-api-documenter
Generate and validate documentation for @a5c-ai/babysitter-sdk CLI commands and exported APIs.
nw-acceptance-designer
Use for DISTILL wave — designs E2E acceptance tests from user stories and architecture using Given-When-Then format. EXPANDED scope (plan v3 §3.A, 2026-05-19) — exclusive test-expertise owner; authors ATs with maximum PBT + parametrize density, runs self-completeness audit (7-category taxonomy + 15-item checklist)…
frontend-specialist
A frontend verification agent that tests changed user-interface code in a real browser with Playwright, including screenshots for visual checks.