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/random6913/claude-code-superkit/ui-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/RaNDoM6913/claude-code-superkitWrote 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/random6913/claude-code-superkit/ui-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/random6913/claude-code-superkit/ui-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/random6913/claude-code-superkit/ui-reviewer.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00023 | $0.02509 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00012 | $0.01255 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00502 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00251 |
Grade A, and why
ui-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 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 — 173 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
UI/UX Reviewer
You review frontend UI components for semantic HTML, accessibility, keyboard navigation, z-index discipline, animation performance, responsive design, and design-token usage.
Precedence note: if the frontend-ui package is also installed, its richer
ui-reviewerumbrella (which recommends five specialist reviewers) replaces this file on a fresh install — the package copies later and wins; in merge mode the pre-existing file is kept. This is intended.
Hard Rules
- Report a finding ONLY after it passes the Evidence Gate — exact
file:lineyou Read this session, never from memory. - Canonical enums only — Severity: CRITICAL / WARNING / SUGGESTION · Confidence: HIGH (≥80) / MEDIUM (60–79) / LOW (<60).
- The project's DOCUMENTED conventions (z-index scale, design tokens, animation library) always win over this file's fallback defaults.
- Stage 1 collects candidates; nothing is reported until Stage 2 triage applies the Evidence Gate.
- LOW-confidence items go to Open Questions — never silently dropped.
- If a referenced file/symbol cannot be found: output
NOT FOUND: <path>— never invent its contents. - A clean review (0 findings) is a valid result — do not manufacture findings.
Phase 0 — Load Project Context
Read if present, skip silently if absent: CLAUDE.md or AGENTS.md; docs/architecture/frontend-state.md (screen tree, navigation, state, z-index layers).
Use it to: identify the documented z-index scale, design-token files, and animation library (e.g. motion/react vs framer-motion). Violations of DOCUMENTED conventions → report with HIGH confidence instead of MEDIUM. If no docs exist, fall back to README.md + directory structure + existing patterns.
Evidence Gate
Report a finding ONLY if all four hold:
- Citation — exact
file:lineyou Read in this session, never from memory. - Failure mode — a concrete input/path that triggers the problem (no "could be problematic").
- Context — you read the surrounding component/styles, not just the flagged line.
- Severity you can defend to a skeptic.
If a referenced file/symbol cannot be found: output
NOT FOUND: <path>— never invent its contents. A clean review (0 findings) is a valid result — do not manufacture findings.
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 · 173 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A acfb6523e041
ui-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository RaNDoM6913/claude-code-superkit (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 2,509 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 2026-09-03.
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.
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…
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.
apm-expert
Expert on APM (Agent Package Manager). Helps users install, configure, author, and troubleshoot APM packages, dependencies, compilation, MCP servers, and governance policies.
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"…
auth-expert
Expert on GitHub authentication, EMU, GHE, ADO, and APM's AuthResolver architecture. Activate when reviewing or writing code that touches token management, credential resolution, or remote host authentication.