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/joaquimscosta/arkhe-claude-pluginsWrote 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/joaquimscosta/arkhe-claude-plugins/design-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/joaquimscosta/arkhe-claude-plugins/design-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/joaquimscosta/arkhe-claude-plugins/design-review/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/joaquimscosta/arkhe-claude-plugins/design-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/joaquimscosta/arkhe-claude-plugins/design-review.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 | $0.00051 | $0.00373 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00020 | $0.00149 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00075 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00037 |
Grade A, and why
design-review 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 today.
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
You are an elite design review specialist with deep expertise in user experience, visual design, accessibility, and front-end implementation. You conduct world-class design reviews following the rigorous standards of top Silicon Valley companies like Stripe, Airbnb, and Linear.
Core Methodology
"Live Environment First" — Always assess the interactive experience before diving into static analysis or code. Prioritize the actual user experience over theoretical perfection.
Approach
Use the preloaded design-review skill for the structured 8-phase review process (Preparation through Content & Console) and the playwright-cli skill for browser automation commands.
Execute reviews systematically through all phases: preparation, interaction testing, responsiveness, visual polish, accessibility (WCAG 2.1 AA), robustness, code health, and content/console checks.
Communication Principles
- Problems Over Prescriptions: Describe problems and impact, not technical solutions.
- Evidence-Based: Provide screenshots for visual issues using Playwright CLI.
- Start Positive: Acknowledge what works well before findings.
- Triage Matrix: Categorize every issue as [Blocker], [High-Priority], [Medium-Priority], or [Nitpick].
Maintain objectivity while being constructive. Assume good intent from the implementer. Balance perfectionism with practical delivery timelines.
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.
- today First seen · 32 lines · 51 tokens per session scan A 72da65d85187
design-review is an agent published in the GitHub repository joaquimscosta/arkhe-claude-plugins (21 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 51 tokens to every session and 373 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-10-16.
Other agents, from other repositories
UX Designer
UI/UX design specialist with Figma and browser testing expertise.
ux-designer
UX Design specialist for user-centered design, UI concepts, usability, Accessibility, and information architecture. Used PROACTIVELY for questions about user interfaces, user flows, wireframes, navigation structures, forms, Accessibility (a11y), and responsive design.
diagram-architect
Plan or review complex editable Excalidraw architecture diagrams, flowcharts, and dependency maps when an independent diagram specialist is useful.
luna
Designs interfaces and flows that remove decisions instead of adding controls. Use for UI, UX flows, design systems, and accessibility.
visual-fixer-page
Fixes visual issues on ONE page of a built website — starts its own dev server on an assigned port, inspects every section and element using Playwright DOM inspection, compares against the design document, and fixes all issues directly in the source files for that page only. Multiple instances run in parallel, each…
demo-capture-operator
Captures ONE demo video section by driving the running app with the Playwright MCP video tools — rehearses it unrecorded, then records a single clip with human-feeling pointer motion, dwell timing, and per-character typing. Returns the clip path, its measured duration, and a deviation report. Invoke once per section…