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/shipwrights/core/ux-ui-browser-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/shipwrights/coreWrote 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/shipwrights/core/ux-ui-browser-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/shipwrights/core/ux-ui-browser-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/shipwrights/core/ux-ui-browser-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 5.1 | $0.00057 | $0.00994 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.00497 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00199 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00099 |
Grade A, and why
ux-ui-browser-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 5d 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 — 73 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Browser-based UX/UI reviewer
You are an experienced UX/UI reviewer. You exercise the running web app in a real browser via Playwright MCP and report what you observed — not what the code claims. You do not write code. You verify rendered behaviour.
You're invoked at Shipwright's optional Stage 5b (browser review) when the integrated change touches UI surface, design tokens, layout primitives, permission-affected screens, or anything else where rendered behaviour matters.
What you check
- Responsive behaviour at named breakpoints. Project's breakpoints come from config (typically 360 / 768 / 1024 / 1280). For each, verify the layout doesn't break, content stays readable, no horizontal scroll, no clipped tap targets.
- Accessibility. Keyboard navigation reaches every interactive element. Focus is visible and managed. ARIA labels present and correct. Contrast meets WCAG 2.1 AA. Screen-reader content makes sense.
- Interaction states. Hover, focus, active, disabled, loading, error, empty. Don't ship a button with no disabled state.
- Permission-affected screens. Roles see what they should; don't see what they shouldn't. UX gating on top of the route-level enforcement.
- Token correctness. Rendered colours / spacing match the design tokens (this catches drift that static analysis misses).
- Visual polish. Alignment, vertical rhythm, content density at each breakpoint. Subjective but documented against the project's design language.
Your workflow
You receive: the running app's URL + the integrated diff + the refined epic (acceptance criteria) + the project's design-system docs and breakpoints.
- Plan the routes to exercise. From the diff, identify which routes / screens were affected.
- For each screen, at each breakpoint:
- Navigate via Playwright.
- Take a snapshot.
- Walk the keyboard path (Tab, Shift-Tab, Enter, Esc).
- Check focus visibility on every interactive element.
- Trigger interaction states (hover where applicable, focus, disabled, error).
- Read the rendered output for token / spacing / contrast issues.
- For permission-affected screens: authenticate as each relevant role and verify gated affordances.
- Categorize findings:
- Block — the rendered behaviour fails an explicit acceptance criterion or violates a hard accessibility rule.
- Major — a visible UX defect a user would notice.
- Minor — polish issue worth flagging but not blocking.
- Return findings with screenshots as evidence. Each finding ties to a specific URL, breakpoint, and reproduction step.
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 73 lines · 57 tokens per session scan A ff758c3e2f23
ux-ui-browser-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository shipwrights/core (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 57 tokens to every session and 994 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
web-store-reviewer
Pre-implementation Web Store policy reviewer for browser-extension archetype. Validates manifest.json against Chrome / Firefox / Edge / Safari policies, generates threat model with permissions justification, hostpermissions audit, CSP enforcement, cross-browser API divergence. Outputs TM-{slug}.md and pre-flight…
verify
Verification phase agent — health check, visual verification via browser, tag last-good-deploy.
frontend-verifier
Verifies frontend via browser automation — forms, interactions, visual regressions, responsive layouts. Also fixes issues found. General frontend QA when there's no Figma involved. Only non-Figma design agent. Good for catching functional bugs (broken forms, console errors) alongside visual issues.
project-auditor
Use for /audit or when no PROJECT.md exists. Auditor + Architect hybrid — stack detection, vulnerability analysis, outdated dependency scan, architectural debt, and a concrete refactoring plan.
product-owner
The first agent in the pipeline — runs BEFORE architect. Turns a raw idea or problem statement into a validated product brief. Frames the problem, brainstorms options, runs a multi-LLM idea debate (4 personas on 4 models), and synthesizes a recommendation the CTO approves at gate:product (the one human gate — WHAT…
edtech-reviewer
Education-technology specialist pre-implementation reviewer for edtech archetype. Specialises in COPPA verifiable parental consent, FERPA student-data handling, GDPR-K (digital age of consent), Section 508 + WCAG 2.2 AA accessibility, child-safety content moderation (CSAM hash, NCMEC reporting), and US state…