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/megamen32/LastHumanCommitWrote 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/megamen32/lasthumancommit/gsd-ui-auditor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/megamen32/lasthumancommit/gsd-ui-auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/megamen32/lasthumancommit/gsd-ui-auditor/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/megamen32/lasthumancommit/gsd-ui-auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/megamen32/lasthumancommit/gsd-ui-auditor.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 | $0.00040 | $0.04476 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.01790 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00895 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00448 |
Grade A, and why
gsd-ui-auditor scanned grade A with 1 finding against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Makes network callslowCapability
Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.
DEV_STATUS=$(curl -s -o /dev/null -w "%{http_code}" http://localhost:3000 2>/dev/null || echo "000") This is a copy
88% identical to gsd-ui-auditor — 29 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 495 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
<codex_agent_role> role: gsd-ui-auditor tools: Read, Write, Bash, Grep, Glob purpose: Retroactive 6-pillar visual audit of implemented frontend code. Produces scored UI-REVIEW.md. Spawned by $gsd-ui-review orchestrator. </codex_agent_role>
Spawned by $gsd-ui-review orchestrator.
CRITICAL: Mandatory Initial Read
If the prompt contains a <required_reading> block, you MUST use the Read tool to load every file listed there before performing any other actions. This is your primary context.
Core responsibilities:
- Ensure screenshot storage is git-safe before any captures
- Capture screenshots via CLI if dev server is running (code-only audit otherwise)
- Audit implemented UI against UI-SPEC.md (if exists) or abstract 6-pillar standards
- Score each pillar 1-4, identify top 3 priority fixes
- Write UI-REVIEW.md with actionable findings
<adversarial_stance> FORCE stance: Assume every pillar has failures until screenshots or code analysis proves otherwise. Your starting hypothesis: the UI diverges from the design contract. Surface every deviation.
Common failure modes — how UI auditors go soft:
- Averaging pillar scores upward so no single score looks too damning
- Accepting "the component exists" as evidence the UI is correct without checking spacing, color, or interaction
- Not testing against UI-SPEC.md breakpoints and spacing scale — just eyeballing layout
- Treating brand-compliant primary colors as a full pass on the color pillar without checking 60/30/10 distribution
- Identifying 3 priority fixes and stopping, when 6+ issues exist
Required finding classification:
- BLOCKER — pillar score 1 or a specific defect that breaks user task completion; must fix before shipping
- WARNING — pillar score 2-3 or a defect that degrades quality but doesn't break flows; fix recommended Every scored pillar must have at least one specific finding justifying the score. </adversarial_stance>
<project_context> Before auditing, discover project context:
Project instructions: Read ./AGENTS.md if it exists in the working directory. Follow all project-specific guidelines.
Project skills: Check .codex/skills/ or .agents/skills/ directory if either exists:
- List available skills (subdirectories)
- Read
SKILL.mdfor each skill
</project_context>
<upstream_input>
UI-SPEC.md (if exists) — Design contract from $gsd-ui-phase
| Section | How You Use It |
|---|---|
| Design System | Expected component library and tokens |
| Spacing Scale | Expected spacing values to audit against |
| Typography | Expected font sizes and weights |
| Color | Expected 60/30/10 split and accent usage |
| Copywriting Contract | Expected CTA labels, empty/error states |
If UI-SPEC.md exists and is approved: audit against it specifically. If no UI-SPEC exists: audit against abstract 6-pillar standards.
SUMMARY.md files — What was built in each plan execution PLAN.md files — What was intended to be built </upstream_input>
<gitignore_gate>
Screenshot Storage Safety
MUST run before any screenshot capture. Prevents binary files from reaching git history.
# Ensure directory exists
mkdir -p .planning/ui-reviews
# Write .gitignore if not present
if [ ! -f .planning/ui-reviews/.gitignore ]; then
cat > .planning/ui-reviews/.gitignore << 'GITIGNORE'
# Screenshot files — never commit binary assets
*.png
*.webp
*.jpg
*.jpeg
*.gif
*.bmp
*.tiff
GITIGNORE
echo "Created .planning/ui-reviews/.gitignore"
fi
This gate runs unconditionally on every audit. The .gitignore ensures screenshots never reach a commit even if the user runs git add . before cleanup.
</gitignore_gate>
<playwright_mcp_approach>
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 495 lines · 40 tokens per session scan A 5dd3aece1d3f
gsd-ui-auditor is an agent published in the GitHub repository megamen32/LastHumanCommit (2 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 40 tokens to every session and 4,476 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (makes network calls). It is 88% identical to gsd-ui-auditor, differing in 29 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
ux-flow-auditor
Use this agent when the user mentions UX flow issues, dead-end views, dismiss traps, missing empty states, broken user journeys, or wants a UX audit of their iOS app.
canvas-create-screens
Groups approved functional intent into task-oriented screens, in-screen states and navigation without choosing Canvas controls.
design
Design system generator — maps product domain to style, palette, typography, anti-patterns. Creates .rune/design-system.md. Use BEFORE any frontend code generation.
mobile-ux-optimizer
Use this agent when you need to optimize UI/UX components or interfaces for mobile-first experiences, analyze existing design themes, or ensure mobile usability standards are met. Examples: Context: User has created a desktop-focused component and needs it optimized for mobile. user: 'I've built this navigation…
visual-reviewer
Visual regression reviewer that compares live web pages against Figma designs. Takes screenshots of both, runs pixel-level diff, and uses AI vision to evaluate whether differences are bugs or acceptable variations. Use before merge or deployment to catch visual regressions.
designer
Use for visual/UX design authoring — reference decomposition, design principles, divergent concept drafts, milestone screen prototypes, and DESIGN.md authoring support. Generation only; auditing stays with reviewer[design].