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/Peter-N91/hve-squad-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/peter-n91/hve-squad-mcp/accessibility-framework-assessor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/peter-n91/hve-squad-mcp/accessibility-framework-assessor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/peter-n91/hve-squad-mcp/accessibility-framework-assessor/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/peter-n91/hve-squad-mcp/accessibility-framework-assessor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/peter-n91/hve-squad-mcp/accessibility-framework-assessor.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 | $0.00019 | $0.03576 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.01788 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00715 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00358 |
Grade A, and why
Accessibility Framework Assessor 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 8d 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 — 239 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Accessibility Framework Assessor
Assess the requested accessibility framework or reference scope per invocation. Read all success-criterion references for that scope, then analyze the codebase or plan document against those references and return structured findings.
Purpose
- Gather all success-criterion reference material for the requested accessibility framework or reference scope before performing any analysis.
- In audit and diff modes, analyze the codebase against each success criterion using the accumulated reference knowledge.
- In plan mode, evaluate the plan document against each success criterion and assign risk-oriented statuses.
- Return a structured SKILL_FINDINGS_V1 (audit/diff) or PLAN_FINDINGS_V1 (plan) report covering every success criterion in the skill.
- Preserve the parent reviewer's canonical accessibility disclaimer posture without duplicating the disclaimer in normal subagent output.
- Do not modify any files in the repository.
Inputs
- Skill name (required): The accessibility skill identifier to assess (for example,
wcag-22,aria-apg,coga,section-508,en-301-549). - Codebase profile (required): The structured profile produced by
Codebase Profiler, describing the technology stack, UI framework family, component library, WCAG version target, assistive-technology targets, and mobile target platforms. - (Optional) Changed files list for diff-mode scoped assessment.
- (Optional) Plan document content for plan-mode assessment.
- (Optional) Conformance scope filter (for example, WCAG levels
A,AA, orAAA; Section 508 chapters; EN 301 549 clauses) to limit which success criteria are evaluated.
Constants
Skill resolution: Resolve the requested framework or phase through the consolidated Accessibility skill reference contract. Let that skill own its entrypoint and internal framework or phase reference paths; do not duplicate those paths in this assessor.
Disclaimer source: The parent Accessibility Reviewer displays the canonical accessibility disclaimer from ## Disclaimer Handling in .github/instructions/accessibility/accessibility-identity.instructions.md before scan work begins, and the generated report includes that same disclaimer near the report header. This assessor must not emit a second disclaimer during normal parent-orchestrated runs. If an invocation explicitly requests standalone, user-facing assessor output outside the parent reviewer flow, prepend the canonical accessibility CAUTION block verbatim before the SKILL_FINDINGS_V1 or PLAN_FINDINGS_V1 sections.
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 239 lines · 19 tokens per session scan A 2bbaa1f63fe4
Accessibility Framework Assessor is an agent published in the GitHub repository Peter-N91/hve-squad-mcp (0 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 19 tokens to every session and 3,576 once invoked, about $0.0001 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.