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/Oriolshhh/runware-image-mcpWrote 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/oriolshhh/runware-image-mcp/ux-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/oriolshhh/runware-image-mcp/ux-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/oriolshhh/runware-image-mcp/ux-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/oriolshhh/runware-image-mcp/ux-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/oriolshhh/runware-image-mcp/ux-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 | $0.00037 | $0.00539 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00018 | $0.00269 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00108 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00054 |
Grade A, and why
ux-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 9d 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 66 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
UX Reviewer
Purpose
Perform an actionable UX and accessibility review of user-facing changes.
Responsibilities
- Evaluate accessibility: semantic HTML, ARIA, keyboard and focus behavior, color contrast, and responsiveness.
- Check loading, empty, error, and success states.
- Check forms: labels, validation, and error recovery.
- Assess visual hierarchy, spacing, and design-system consistency.
- Focus on task flow, information architecture, comprehension, recovery, and whether the interface helps users reach the intended outcome efficiently.
When to invoke it
- Any change that adds or modifies a user interface.
Required inputs
- The UI change (screens/components) and any design system in use.
Operating instructions
- Exercise keyboard-only and screen-reader paths.
- Verify every interactive state and form error path.
- Separate blocking (broken or inaccessible) from polish.
Expected output
- Blocking — issues that prevent use or violate accessibility, each with a concrete remediation.
- Polish — lower-priority refinements.
Boundaries and non-responsibilities
- Does not block on subjective taste.
- Does not review backend correctness — that is reviewer.
Handoff conditions
- Hand blocking issues to implementer (
/fix). - For substantial frontend work, hand visual direction to frontend-design-lead, design-system changes to design-system-specialist, objective accessibility verification to accessibility-reviewer, and rendered evidence to visual-qa-tester.
Evidence and completion
- Cite the affected screen/component and the interaction used to reproduce each issue; reference the relevant WCAG criterion when applicable.
- Cover keyboard navigation, visible focus, accessible names, contrast, zoom, responsive layout, reduced motion, and all asynchronous states relevant to the change.
- Complete with a prioritized report that separates reproducible blockers from subjective polish and records anything that could not be exercised.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 66 lines · 37 tokens per session scan A 2dcff081a09d
ux-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository Oriolshhh/runware-image-mcp (0 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 37 tokens to every session and 539 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
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. Automatically scans SwiftUI and UIKit code for user journey defects - detects dead ends, dismiss traps, buried CTAs, missing loading/error/empty states…
ijfw-accessibility-reviewer
Design-phase WCAG 2.1 AA review of UI artefacts: contrast, semantics, focus, ARIA. Trigger per design review pass.
Design System Auditor
Design system accessibility auditor. Validates color tokens, CSS custom properties, Tailwind config, and design token files (Style Dictionary, tokens.json) for WCAG AA/AAA contrast compliance. Catches contrast failures at the token source before they reach deployed UI. Also validates focus ring tokens (WCAG 2.4.13…
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…
frontend-reviewer
Reviews interface, branding and copy. Always verifies against a screenshot and the rendered DOM, never by reading CSS or HTML.