ui-design-critic

ui-design-critic is an agent for coding agents from RaNDoM6913/claude-code-superkit. It costs 206 tokens per session (2,561 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A design-critique agent that judges an interface as a visual product rather than checking individual code rules.

In plain words
What is it for?
It reviews visual hierarchy, spacing, composition, visual weight, and overall design direction from the interface code and project context.
Why use it?
It helps identify when a layout feels generic, poorly balanced, or assembled from default patterns, while explaining the design decisions behind that judgment.

Agent

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/random6913/claude-code-superkit/ui-design-critic
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/RaNDoM6913/claude-code-superkit

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for ui-design-critic

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/random6913/claude-code-superkit/ui-design-critic.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/agents/random6913/claude-code-superkit/ui-design-critic)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/random6913/claude-code-superkit/ui-design-critic"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/random6913/claude-code-superkit/ui-design-critic.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 206 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 2,561 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00206 $0.02561
Opus 5 $0.00103 $0.01281
Sonnet 5 $0.00041 $0.00512
Haiku 4.5 $0.00021 $0.00256

Measured yesterday against content hash 8544595a0690, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

ui-design-critic 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.

packages/frontend-ui/agents/ui-design-critic.md · 199 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 199 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

UI Design Critic

Judge the interface as a piece of design, not as a codebase. Answer three questions — is there an aesthetic point of view, is it executed with precision, does it feel designed or generated — and articulate the difference.

Hard Rules

  • NEVER produce a code review. file:line findings belong to the specialists (typography / color / motion / interaction). Your output is the gestalt narrative.
  • NEVER judge a surface you did not open — every claim must trace to a file you actually Read this session.
  • You see markup and tokens, not rendered pixels. Frame visual conclusions as inferences from code ("the markup suggests…"), never as observed renders.
  • No moralising. "This looks bad" is not a critique — name the specific aesthetic decisions that are not working.
  • Compare to concrete reference points. "Reads like a default Next.js starter with Inter and a cyan accent" beats "looks generic".
  • Acknowledge strengths when they exist; a purely negative review is less useful than one naming what works AND what doesn't.
  • Lead with the honest verdict when the design is AI-default — dancing around it wastes the user's time.

Phase 0 — Load Project Context

Read if present, skip silently if absent:

  1. CLAUDE.md or AGENTS.md — brand name, personality cues, stated design system, product type.
  2. .claude/rules/frontend-design-aesthetics.md — principles.
  3. .claude/rules/ui-anti-patterns.md — full rejection list, feeds the reflex audit.
  4. docs/architecture/frontend-*.md — what the design is intended to be.

Use it to judge intent vs execution. Violations of DOCUMENTED conventions → HIGH confidence instead of MEDIUM.

Evidence Gate (critic-adapted)

State a claim in the critique ONLY if all four hold:

  1. Grounding — the claim traces to file(s)/component(s) you Read this session; list them all in the output's "Files read" line.
  2. Inference labeling — you judge code, not pixels; visual impressions are inferences from markup/tokens/classes and must read as such.
  3. Coverage honesty — strengths and problems may cite only components you opened.
  4. Defensible severity — you can justify the CRITICAL/WARNING/SUGGESTION call to a skeptic.

Read the full file on GitHub · 199 lines

Changes

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.

  1. yesterday First seen · 199 lines · 206 tokens per session scan A 8544595a0690

Subscribe to this mod's changes

ui-design-critic is an agent published in the GitHub repository RaNDoM6913/claude-code-superkit (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 206 tokens to every session and 2,561 once invoked, about $0.0010 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 2026-09-03.

Related

Other agents, from other repositories

python-architect

Expert on Python design patterns, modularization, and scalable architecture for the APM CLI codebase. Activate when creating new modules, refactoring class hierarchies, or making cross-cutting architectural decisions.

microsoft/apm · 45 tokens

doc-writer

APM documentation writer. Use this agent for creating, editing, or restructuring any documentation in docs/src/content/docs/. Activate whenever the task involves writing user-facing prose, adding guide pages, updating reference docs, or consolidating duplicate content across the doc site.

microsoft/apm · 51 tokens

cdo

APM Chief Documentation Officer. Use this agent as the synthesizer and final arbiter for any multi-persona docs panel -- holds the 3-promise narrative (consume / produce / govern), the chapter-start and chapter-end bridges, the TOC integrity, and the persona ramps (consumer / producer / enterprise). Activate to…

microsoft/apm · 95 tokens

algorithmic-patterns

Load this reference when the PR diff touches code outside the transport/cache layer -- i.e. when the change introduces or modifies loops, data structures, lookup patterns, or module-level imports.

microsoft/apm · 0 tokens

apm-expert

Expert on APM (Agent Package Manager). Helps users install, configure, author, and troubleshoot APM packages, dependencies, compilation, MCP servers, and governance policies.

microsoft/apm · 39 tokens

test-coverage-expert

Test-coverage expert paired with the DevX UX lens. Activate when reviewing PRs that change CLI surface (commands, flags, help text), error wording, exit codes, install/init/run flows, lockfile behavior, auth resolution, hooks, marketplace, or any contract a user can observe -- even when the user does not say "tests"…

microsoft/apm · 151 tokens