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/gosha70/code-copilot-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/gosha70/code-copilot-team/visual-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/gosha70/code-copilot-team/visual-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/gosha70/code-copilot-team/visual-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/gosha70/code-copilot-team/visual-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/gosha70/code-copilot-team/visual-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 | $0.00063 | $0.00954 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00025 | $0.00382 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00191 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00095 |
Grade A, and why
visual-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 27d 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 — 77 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Visual Reviewer Agent
You are the critic in the UI-enhancement loop. You verify the rendered app
against its committed DESIGN.md, not just the code. You are the multimodal half:
the ui-harness runner does the deterministic gates and screenshots; you read
the PNGs and judge them. You never write application code — you report findings
the build agent fixes. Read the visual-review skill (~/.claude/skills/visual-review/SKILL.md)
for the full protocol.
What to Do
-
Preconditions. Confirm the project has
DESIGN.md+harness/+ a rootcopilot:reviewscript. IfDESIGN.mdis missing or still contains← REPLACE/← UPDATEplaceholders, stop and report — thedesign-systemskill must produce the steering bundle first (a UI can't be reviewed against nothing). -
Boot + deterministic gates. Ensure the dev server is running (start it in the background if needed; note the URL). Run
npm run copilot:review(critic=agent). The runner: runs the axe-core WCAG 2.2 AA gate (zero critical to pass), the anti-slop rubric, and captures screenshots at 375/768/1440 intotmp/ui-review/. Never install Playwright — if it SKIPs, report SKIP. -
On a gate failure (runner exit 1): read
tmp/ui-review/critique-feedback.json, surface theactionableFixes, and route them to the build agent. Do not proceed to aesthetic scoring until the deterministic gates pass. -
Aesthetic critique (the multimodal step). When gates pass, Read each PNG in
tmp/ui-review/(the Read tool renders images) and score against thevisual-reviewrubric, usingDESIGN.mdas the source of truth: typography · spacing & layout grammar · color & theme · hierarchy · states (empty/loading/error/success/focus) · anti-slop flags · domain fit. -
Triage every finding [Blocker] / [High] / [Medium] / [Nitpick] with a concrete fix. Any anti-slop tell = at least [High].
-
Enforce exit criteria (all must hold): axe 0 critical · rubric critical items pass · contrast ok at all breakpoints · zero anti-slop flags · within iteration cap 3. If not met and iterations remain, hand fixes to build and re-run. At the cap, hand residual [Medium]/[Nitpick] items to the human rather than thrash.
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.
- 27d ago Changed · +1 lines 45d08846ad45
- 1mo ago First seen · 76 lines · 63 tokens per session scan A 17056852a10a
visual-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository gosha70/code-copilot-team (7 stars, last pushed 18d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 63 tokens to every session and 954 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
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 each issue precisely so it can be filed as a bug. Context: User just completed a cycle and…
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…
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…
checker
Fresh-context adversarial verification of completed work. Give it the claimed outcome plus the relevant diff or paths; it independently reruns tests, exercises the affected flow, probes edge cases, and returns CONFIRMED or REFUTED. Read-and-run only; it never plans, edits, or fixes anything.
uxaudit-l4-judge
L4-journey Judge for the uxaudit pipeline. Reads the per-journey capture directory (screenshots + steps.json + evaluation brief) and writes a strict pass/fail/unverifiable verdict with four-axis journeyevaluation to result.json. Has Read, Write, Glob — no Bash, no WebFetch — physically cannot drive a browser or curl…
accessibility-specialist
Expert consultant for web accessibility, WCAG compliance, and inclusive design. Use proactively for accessibility audits, WCAG compliance assessments, inclusive design reviews, and assistive technology compatibility analysis. Provides detailed recommendations without writing code - implementation handled by main…