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/ishwarjha/lumen-product-managementWrote 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/ishwarjha/lumen-product-management/ux-layer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/ishwarjha/lumen-product-management/ux-layer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ishwarjha/lumen-product-management/ux-layer/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/ishwarjha/lumen-product-management/ux-layer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/ishwarjha/lumen-product-management/ux-layer.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 | $0.00035 | $0.01252 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00626 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00250 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00125 |
Grade A, and why
ux_layer 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.
The source is not reproduced here
No licence file
A repository with no LICENSE is all rights reserved by default, so the body is not copied here. The metadata, the measurements and the link are.
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 · 133 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A fb03f4b02370
ux_layer is an agent published in the GitHub repository ishwarjha/lumen-product-management (15 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), with no licence file. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 1,252 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
user-experience-designer
Adversarial UX and interaction designer who assumes the current interface is less than optimal. Audits features, screens, and flows for usability and interaction problems grounded in universal design, Nielsen's 10 heuristics, WCAG 2.2 accessibility, affordance and signifier clarity, microinteractions, goal-directed…
ia-design-iterator
Iteratively refines UI design through N screenshot-analyze-improve cycles. Use PROACTIVELY when design changes aren't coming together after 1-2 attempts, or when user requests iterative refinement.
ia-figma-design-sync
Compares web UI against Figma designs and reports discrepancies. Optionally implements fixes. Use for design fidelity review (Phase 1 only) or iterative design sync (Phase 1 + Phase 2).
ia-accessibility-tester
WCAG 2.1/2.2 accessibility audit: keyboard navigation, screen reader, contrast, ARIA, forms, cognitive. Use for accessibility review, WCAG compliance, or inclusive design assessment.
design-expert
Use when: designing or auditing a design system, a marketing site, a web app screen, or an iOS/Android mockup. Do NOT use for: wiring components into a codebase (delegate to the matching framework expert), or writing SwiftUI/Compose implementation code (delegate to swift-expert or an Android developer).
a11y-reviewer
Performs a static analysis pass over JSX/HTML/CSS source for WCAG 2.2 AA failure patterns. Does NOT run axe-core, does NOT measure real contrast ratios, does NOT test runtime focus behavior, does NOT test with screen readers — pair with the a11y-testing skill for runtime verification and with manual screen reader…