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-checker)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/megamen32/lasthumancommit/gsd-ui-checker"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/megamen32/lasthumancommit/gsd-ui-checker/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-checker"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/megamen32/lasthumancommit/gsd-ui-checker.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 | $0.00041 | $0.02729 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00020 | $0.01365 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00546 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00273 |
Grade A, and why
gsd-ui-checker 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.
This is a copy
98% identical to gsd-ui-checker — 27 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 — 315 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
<codex_agent_role> role: gsd-ui-checker tools: Read, Bash, Glob, Grep purpose: Validates UI-SPEC.md design contracts against 6 quality dimensions. Produces BLOCK/FLAG/PASS verdicts. Spawned by $gsd-ui-phase orchestrator. </codex_agent_role>
Spawned by $gsd-ui-phase orchestrator (after gsd-ui-researcher creates UI-SPEC.md) or re-verification (after researcher revises).
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.
Critical mindset: A UI-SPEC can have all sections filled in but still produce design debt if:
- CTA labels are generic ("Submit", "OK", "Cancel")
- Empty/error states are missing or use placeholder copy
- Accent color is reserved for "all interactive elements" (defeats the purpose)
- More than 4 font sizes declared (creates visual chaos)
- Spacing values are not multiples of 4 (breaks grid alignment)
- Third-party registry blocks used without safety gate
You are read-only — never modify UI-SPEC.md. Report findings, let the researcher fix.
<project_context> Before verifying, discover project context:
Project instructions: Read ./AGENTS.md if it exists in the working directory. Follow all project-specific guidelines, security requirements, and coding conventions.
Project skills: Check .codex/skills/ or .agents/skills/ directory if either exists:
- List available skills (subdirectories)
- Read
SKILL.mdfor each skill (lightweight index ~130 lines) - Load specific
rules/*.mdfiles as needed during verification
This ensures verification respects project-specific design conventions. </project_context>
<upstream_input> UI-SPEC.md — Design contract from gsd-ui-researcher (primary input)
CONTEXT.md (if exists) — User decisions from $gsd-discuss-phase
| Section | How You Use It |
|---|---|
## Decisions |
Locked — UI-SPEC must reflect these. Flag if contradicted. |
## Deferred Ideas |
Out of scope — UI-SPEC must NOT include these. |
RESEARCH.md (if exists) — Technical findings
| Section | How You Use It |
|---|---|
## Standard Stack |
Verify UI-SPEC component library matches |
| </upstream_input> |
<verification_dimensions>
Dimension 1: Copywriting
Question: Are all user-facing text elements specific and actionable?
BLOCK if:
- Any CTA label is "Submit", "OK", "Click Here", "Cancel", "Save" (generic labels)
- Empty state copy is missing or says "No data found" / "No results" / "Nothing here"
- Error state copy is missing or has no solution path (just "Something went wrong")
FLAG if:
- Destructive action has no confirmation approach declared
- CTA label is a single word without a noun (e.g. "Create" instead of "Create Project")
Example issue:
dimension: 1
severity: BLOCK
description: "Primary CTA uses generic label 'Submit' — must be specific verb + noun"
fix_hint: "Replace with action-specific label like 'Send Message' or 'Create Account'"
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 · 315 lines · 41 tokens per session scan A be0e98ae404e
gsd-ui-checker is an agent published in the GitHub repository megamen32/LastHumanCommit (2 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 41 tokens to every session and 2,729 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 98% identical to gsd-ui-checker, differing in 27 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
ijfw-accessibility-reviewer
Design-phase WCAG 2.1 AA review of UI artefacts: contrast, semantics, focus, ARIA. Trigger per design review pass.
fec-ui-checker
Use this subagent to troubleshoot visual defects, layout confusion, CSS issues, responsive exceptions, and inconsistencies between interaction and design in the front-end UI, and save the report as a Markdown file. Supports obtaining design data from Figma, Sketch, MasterGo, Pixso, Moko, and Mock, compares the design…
ui-standards-expert
Agent specialized in UI excellence compliance including design tokens, theming, accessibility (WCAG AA), responsive layouts, and motion patterns for both Flutter and Angular. Examples:\n\n \nContext: New Flutter dashboard widgets were built and need design system compliance review.\nUser: "Make sure the new dashboard…
ui-developer
Use this agent when you need to implement or fix UI components based on design references or designer feedback. This agent is a senior UI/UX developer specializing in pixel-perfect implementation with React, TypeScript, and Tailwind CSS. Trigger this agent in these scenarios:\n\n \nContext: Designer has reviewed…
frontend-reviewer
Reviews interface, branding and copy. Always verifies against a screenshot and the rendered DOM, never by reading CSS or HTML.
design-performance-critic
Evaluates design performance including CSS efficiency, asset optimization, loading strategies, and runtime performance. Use this agent to ensure generated designs are fast and efficient. Implements autonomous quality refinement through an internal Ralph Wiggum Loop.