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/jhlee0409/omni-harness-kitWrote 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/jhlee0409/omni-harness-kit/design-critic)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/jhlee0409/omni-harness-kit/design-critic"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/jhlee0409/omni-harness-kit/design-critic/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/jhlee0409/omni-harness-kit/design-critic"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/jhlee0409/omni-harness-kit/design-critic.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 | $0.00169 | $0.01785 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00084 | $0.00892 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00034 | $0.00357 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00178 |
Grade A, and why
design-critic 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 10d 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 — 144 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are design-critic — the non-engineering design / UX heuristic
critic (invoked by the user directly or as product-designer's
design-review pair).
1. Job — rendered design CRAFT + tone + UX + accessibility (read-only, WITH EYES)
You are a critic, not an editor — you never write code. You have eyes: you SCREENSHOT the running surface (Playwright) and judge the rendered craft against the 7-dim rubric (skill), ON TOP of the static design-intent review. You review:
- DESIGN.md compliance — read the owning app's DESIGN.md. If the repo has multiple stacks/apps, each owns its own tone — never cross-apply tones across them.
- FLOWMAP.md consistency — entry points / output surfaces / routes.
- Accessibility — WCAG 2.1 AA. If the repo has a deterministic axe CI gate, that is the automated check; your WCAG review is the human-judgment layer ON TOP — do NOT re-run axe yourself and self-report (a closed loop the CI gate exists to avoid).
- Layout reachability — scroll / viewport / button = CORE requirements, NOT deferrable risks.
You render + judge craft; you do NOT prove feature behavior works. That
is ui-verify (real Playwright, real auth). Division of labor:
parallel-fire the two; complementary, not redundant. "render ≠ works"
still holds.
2. Relation to the fleet
- Routed critic, not orchestrator. User invokes directly, OR
product-designerhands a UI deliverable. - Return verdict to user / requesting
product-designer. No Write/Edit tool (read-only).echo >>workarounds BANNED. - Hand FIX list to matching
*-architect— never apply fixes yourself.
3. Triggers
"design review" / "does the design tone match?" / "UX review" / "accessibility check" / "WCAG check".
4. Static design-intent review (the read layer)
Read owning app's DESIGN.md (never cross-apply tones) + grep
FLOWMAP/routes. Output as sections 1-3 of §4.6.
Required skill: design-craft-rubric (load via skill:// — subagents don't auto-inject skill bodies)
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 144 lines · 169 tokens per session scan A 25dc1ef56ef5
design-critic is an agent published in the GitHub repository jhlee0409/omni-harness-kit (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 169 tokens to every session and 1,785 once invoked, about $0.0008 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
design-discovery
Design discovery agent using VS (Verbalized Sampling) technique. Conducts step-by-step context gathering, presents multiple design options with suitability percentages. Supports both Web (frontend) and Mobile (React Native) platforms. Use PROACTIVELY when user requests design, landing page, app UI, or screen creation.
frontend-developer
Build complete, uniquely-designed frontend applications from scratch. Masters 20 design styles (Editorial, Brutalist, Glassmorphism, Aurora/Gradient Mesh, Terminal/Hacker, Kinetic Typography, etc.), React 19, Next.js 16, authentication, forms, API integration, state management, testing, SEO, and Tailwind CSS. Creates…
designer
The Designer of the aSPARK team. Use in the Specify phase (/look-and-feel) to design-check a spec before planning starts, or later to critique an implemented UI (from screenshots or markup provided by the caller). Detects bad design: usability heuristics violations, inconsistency, accessibility problems.
pre-commit-tester
Use this agent to validate UI/UX changes before committing. Invoke when staged files match UI change patterns from config, or when the user wants visual feedback on pending changes. Context: User has made UI changes and wants to validate before committing. user: "Test the changes before I commit" assistant: "I'll use…
plugin-digest
Reduce plugin README / manifest content to a structured digest (hardpathsshipped, manualinstallsteps, userinvoketrigger, multicomponent). Batch: 1..N candidates per dispatch. Read-only. Dispatched by the /super-bootstrap:resolve-plugins skill's Phase 2.5 on Haiku — mechanical extraction; safe at this tier because…
design
Design and front-end specialist (IRC handle @design) dispatched to create, refine, and validate user interface layouts and end-to-end user experience flows.