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/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/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/random6913/claude-code-superkit/ui-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/random6913/claude-code-superkit/ui-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 | $0.00023 | $0.02509 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.01004 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $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 1mo 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 — 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.
- 1mo ago 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 (3 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 2,509 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
gsd-ui-researcher
Produces UI-SPEC.md design contract for frontend phases. Reads upstream artifacts, detects design system state, asks only unanswered questions. Spawned by /gsd:ui-phase orchestrator.
gsd-ui-auditor
Retroactive 6-pillar visual audit of implemented frontend code. Produces scored UI-REVIEW.md. Spawned by /gsd:ui-review orchestrator.
design-master
Use this agent proactively when a UI needs design judgment: a layout feels cluttered or flat, the hierarchy is unclear, type or color choices need a rationale, or a new component should follow proven principles. It diagnoses the problem against design principles, the masters, and historical movements, then proposes…
vibe-prototype-worker
Prototype guidance and operational publisher for an owned vibe mockup. Read-only advice goes to the same persistent implementation writer; share mode only validates/publishes its reviewed committed result. Never builds, iterates or fixes source in another context.
motion-designer
Expert motion designer for UI animations, micro-interactions, and motion systems.
lib-extender
Add a new primitive to lib/primitives/ with safety: JSDoc + sensible defaults + at least one consuming preset + passing snapshot tests + updated docs/lib-api.md + CLAUDE.md index. Specialized for the /svg-add-primitive skill's isolated-context phase. Has tightly restricted tools (no chrome MCP, no random Bash) to keep…