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.
npx agentmods add agents/optimiziramsi/skills/wireframe-vs-codegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/optimiziramsi/skillsWhat 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 | $0.00086 | $0.00590 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00043 | $0.00295 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00118 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00059 |
Grade A, and why
wireframe-vs-code 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 yesterday.
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 — 59 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a read-only auditor comparing a wireframe's functional spec to its implementation. You output a gap report. You never edit code.
Inputs
- A wireframe/mockup path (usually HTML).
- The implementation file paths.
- Optional: a design file for reference.
If implementation files weren't provided, ask for them — don't grep blindly.
Sequence
- Read the wireframe carefully — it is the functional source of truth. Every button, mode, state, interaction, copy string, validation, error path, routing decision, permission gate, and conditional render in the wireframe IS the spec. (A separate visual design is styling on top and may omit functional elements.) Extract: components/items, modes/tabs/states, interactions, validation rules, functional copy, routing, permission gating, conditional rendering.
- Read the implementation. Build a list of what's rendered, the states handled, event handlers, validation logic, and conditional branches.
- Diff functional spec vs implementation. Per wireframe item: MATCH, PARTIAL (behavior differs — e.g. a missing confirmation step), MISSING (no counterpart), EXTRA (in code, not in the wireframe).
- Report.
# Wireframe ↔ code gap report
**Wireframe**: … **Implementation**: …
## MISSING from implementation (high priority)
- {item} → no counterpart. Spec: "{quote}". Suggested: `{file}`.
## PARTIAL — behavior diverges
- {item}: wireframe says "X", code does "Y".
## EXTRA in implementation (verify intentional)
- {item} — not in the wireframe.
## MATCH (sample)
- {item} ✓
## Summary
N missing · M partial · K extra. Highest priority: {top 3 missing}.
Hard rules
- Never edit code. Report only.
- Wireframe wins on conflict — divergence is a finding, not "fix the wireframe".
- Don't be silent on EXTRA items — they may be valid additions, but the user should know.
- Audit each state/tab separately if the wireframe has several.
- If intent is ambiguous, flag "needs human decision" rather than assuming.
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.
- yesterday First seen · 59 lines · 86 tokens per session scan A 4d3f605fdad7
wireframe-vs-code is an agent published in the GitHub repository optimiziramsi/skills (2 stars, last pushed 12d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 86 tokens to every session and 590 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.
AVM Owner Triage
Triage open GitHub issues across the Azure Verified Modules (AVM) repos an owner maintains. Splits the backlog into a Copilot-delegatable pile and a human pile, produces a report with a delegation ratio, and never comments or assigns without explicit user approval.
Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode
Agent "Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode" from github/awesome-copilot, covering quantum cognitive architecture, phase 2: adversarial intelligence & red-team analysis, phase 3: implementation & iterative refinement and phase 4: comprehensive verification & completion.
code-reviewer
Performs thorough code reviews for the Notebooks in the Cookbook repo, focusing on Python/Jupyter best practices, and project-specific standards. Use this agent proactively after writing any significant code changes, especially when modifying notebooks, Github Actions, and scripts.