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/Jamie-BitFlight/claude_skillsWrote 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/jamie-bitflight/claude_skills/reviewer-accessibility)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/jamie-bitflight/claude_skills/reviewer-accessibility"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/jamie-bitflight/claude_skills/reviewer-accessibility/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/jamie-bitflight/claude_skills/reviewer-accessibility"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/jamie-bitflight/claude_skills/reviewer-accessibility.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 | $0.00106 | $0.00366 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00042 | $0.00146 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00021 | $0.00073 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00037 |
Grade A, and why
reviewer-accessibility 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 21d 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.
What it actually says
Accessibility Reviewer Agent
Before following any other instruction, first load dh:review-accessibility-change and follow its process step by step.
DH wrapper contract
The dispatch supplies the changed-file/task scope and any Review Context. Pass both to the
reusable skill; its independent source checks apply to claims in that context. Load
dh:review-verdict-contract for the authoritative verdict schema and applicability rules owned
by the DH multi-perspective workflow.
Translate the skill result into exactly one structured accessibility verdict block. Write that raw JSON block to the current SAM task's Review Results section using sam_task(... append_section="Review Results"). Do not register it as a document artifact and do not modify reviewed files.
Return the DH subagent STATUS envelope after the task-section write. Missing required task/scope inputs or an unwritable Review Results section is BLOCKED.
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.
- 21d ago Changed · +3 lines 31d2957bec02
- 1mo ago Changed · -186 lines 5123ff7673f9
- 1mo ago Changed · +1 lines 59315d7c001c
- 1mo ago Changed e4ab0fa5f63c
- 1mo ago First seen · 211 lines · 106 tokens per session scan A 396ff6eabefc
reviewer-accessibility is an agent published in the GitHub repository Jamie-BitFlight/claude_skills (67 stars, last pushed 10d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 106 tokens to every session and 366 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-09-03.
Other agents, from other repositories
liquid-glass-auditor
Use this agent when the user mentions Liquid Glass review, iOS 26 UI updates, toolbar improvements, or visual effect migration.
design-system-engineer
Design system engineering specialist for design tokens, component API contracts, theming architecture, CSS architecture, style consistency, and visual regression strategy. Use when the task requires creating a design token system, defining component APIs, implementing theming, or establishing CSS architecture. For…
review-ui-blazor
UI/Blazor reviewer for Razor components. Checks accessibility, culture-dependent rendering, CSS correctness, component lifecycle, and Blazor-specific pitfalls. Returns PASS or FAIL with specific findings. Only runs when .razor files are changed.
ui-interaction-reviewer
Interactive-component review — buttons, modals, drawers, forms, focus states, loading patterns, UX writing, empty states. Checks the invisible details that compound into "feels right": :active states, spatial-consistency entry/exit, modal vs popover transform-origin, inline form errors, focus-visible, optimistic UI…
ui-motion-reviewer
Motion-specific review — runs the 4-question Animation Decision Framework (should it animate? purpose? easing? duration?), catches ease-in on UI, transition:all, scale(0) entry, bounce/elastic defaults, animations on keyboard-triggered actions, prefers-reduced-motion gaps, and poorly-chosen spring vs duration…
ui-typography-reviewer
Typography-specific deep review — font selection, modular scale, line-height, line-length, pairing, tracking, OpenType features, web-font loading. Dispatch when a font-family, font-weight, or type-scale token changed; when a Google Fonts or font-loading import was added or changed; when the user asks about fonts…