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/morodomi/dev-crewWrote 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/morodomi/dev-crew/usability-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/morodomi/dev-crew/usability-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/morodomi/dev-crew/usability-reviewer/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/morodomi/dev-crew/usability-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/morodomi/dev-crew/usability-reviewer.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 | $0.00033 | $0.00264 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00106 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00053 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00026 |
Grade A, and why
usability-reviewer 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 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.
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
Focus
UX/UI cognitive load | Accessibility (WCAG 2.1 AA) | Consistency | User flow (happy path + recovery) | Error experience | State design (empty/loading/micro-interaction)
Output
{"issues": [{"severity": "optional", "message": "...", "suggestion": "..."}]}
severity は critical|important|optional のいずれか。
Severity 基準
- critical = このまま進めば実害（バグ混入・セキュリティ・契約破壊）
- important = 品質・保守性への実影響。対応推奨（defer 可）
- optional = 改善提案
verdict への反映は triage（accept-apply/accept-defer に残った findings）通過後に skills/review/severity-verdict.sh が集計する（reject は除外）。0-100 の自己採点は廃止。
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 Changed · +5 lines 4728b8cccb0d
- 1mo ago First seen · 17 lines · 33 tokens per session scan A 58981a799766
usability-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository morodomi/dev-crew (1 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 33 tokens to every session and 264 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
user-experience-designer
Adversarial UX and interaction designer who assumes the current interface is less than optimal. Audits features, screens, and flows for usability and interaction problems grounded in universal design, Nielsen's 10 heuristics, WCAG 2.2 accessibility, affordance and signifier clarity, microinteractions, goal-directed…
domain-visualizer
Translates a validated Domain-Driven Design analysis into evidence-backed visual artifacts for technical and non-technical stakeholders. Reads the eight persisted artifacts from a completed DDD analysis run — the final context model, critique, and all five discovery artifacts, plus the rendered report — and produces a…
design-advisor
Use after architect, before/parallel to pm, for any UI-bearing feature (landing pages, dashboards, admin panels, web apps, React Native apps). Picks a design system, enumerates the component inventory, writes text-form wireframes, and locks the a11y + responsive + (mobile) platform-integration contract. Outputs…
ia-figma-design-sync
Compares web UI against Figma designs and reports discrepancies. Optionally implements fixes. Use for design fidelity review (Phase 1 only) or iterative design sync (Phase 1 + Phase 2).
ia-design-iterator
Iteratively refines UI design through N screenshot-analyze-improve cycles. Use PROACTIVELY when design changes aren't coming together after 1-2 attempts, or when user requests iterative refinement.
unfolding-ux-designer
UX Designer role in the Unfolding Specs process. Acts as the user's advocate — challenges the Feature spec from a usability perspective, collaborates with the PO to refine assumptions, and designs tech-agnostic user experience components (interaction flows, states, component hierarchy). Commissioned by the PO for…