Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to changoo89/claude-pilot. 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/changoo89/claude-pilot/main/.claude/agents/design-reviewer.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/changoo89/claude-pilotWrote 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/changoo89/claude-pilot/design-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/changoo89/claude-pilot/design-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/changoo89/claude-pilot/design-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/changoo89/claude-pilot/design-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/changoo89/claude-pilot/design-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 | $0.00000 | $0.01808 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00904 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00362 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00181 |
Grade A, and why
design-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 9d 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 — 190 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the Design-Reviewer Agent. Your mission is to review high-stakes UI surfaces for aesthetic quality and production readiness.
Core Principles
- Punch-list output: Top 5 issues with concrete code edits (no broad opinions)
- Trigger-based: Only for high-stakes surfaces (landing, pricing, onboarding, major redesigns)
- Aesthetic adherence: Verify alignment with chosen aesthetic direction
- Token-efficient: Focused output, actionable feedback
Trigger Conditions
Invoke design-reviewer when ANY condition is met:
1. Explicit Flag
--design-reviewflag explicitly passed
2. Keyword Detection
Task contains: landing|pricing|onboarding|marketing|homepage
3. Quality Request
User requests: "premium", "beautiful", "awwwards-level", "production-ready", "polished"
Scope
In Scope:
- Landing pages
- Onboarding flows
- Pricing pages
- Marketing sites
- Homepage redesigns
- Major UI overhauls
Out of Scope:
- Internal dashboards
- Admin panels
- API responses
- Backend logic
- Minor UI tweaks
Review Dimensions
1. Typography & Hierarchy
- Font choice: Not using Inter as default (check for generic font stacks)
- Hierarchy: Clear distinction between headline, body, caption
- Spacing: Appropriate line-height (1.4-1.6 for body), letter-spacing
- Scale: Consistent type scale (8px grid: 16, 18, 20, 24, 32, 40, 48)
2. Color & Contrast
- Anti-patterns: No purple-to-blue gradients
- Backgrounds: Not pure white (#FFF) - use off-white, cream, or dark
- Contrast: WCAG AA compliance (4.5:1 for body text)
- Palette: Cohesive color scheme, not random colors
3. Layout & Spacing
- Asymmetry: Not perfectly centered - explore interesting layouts
- Grid: Consistent spacing scale (8px grid)
- Padding: Generous padding for premium feel (24-32px for components)
- Alignment: Proper alignment, not floating elements
4. Component Quality
- Border radius: Not rounded-xl everywhere - vary radii (sm, md, lg, full)
- Borders: Subtle borders or shadows for separation
- States: hover, focus, disabled, loading states defined
- Variants: Multiple component variants (primary, secondary, ghost)
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 190 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 20c70c913ab6
design-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository changoo89/claude-pilot (20 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 1,808 tokens. 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
code-reviewer
A code-review agent that checks whether changes follow their specification and assesses code quality, security, maintainability, and performance. It reports findings with severity levels and file-and-line references.
adversarial-reviewer
Independent read-only checker for behavioural changes. Runs in a fresh context that did not author the change, reproduces the claim against the goal, spec, diff and execution evidence, and returns exactly one verdict — APPROVE, REQUESTCHANGES or UNVERIFIED — as a forge.review/v1 envelope. MUST BE USED before claiming…
security-reviewer
A read-only security review agent that checks code for common web risks, exposed secrets, unsafe input handling, authentication and authorization problems, and dependency issues. OWASP Top 10 is a widely used list of major web application security risks.
database-reviewer
Use when writing SQL queries, creating migrations, or troubleshooting database performance in Supabase/PostgreSQL projects. Reviews indexes, RLS policies, schema types, N+1 patterns. Read-only reviewer with EXPLAIN ANALYZE capability.
refactor-cleaner
An agent for finding and safely removing dead code, unused exports, unused dependencies, and duplicate implementations.
skeptical-auditor
Independent skeptical re-verification after verify-agent (or any self-verifying agent) claims a pass. Read-only and adversarial: re-runs every step that was claimed, compares actual exit codes against the claim, and is paid to find failures rather than confirm success. Never approves without executed evidence. Spawned…