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/srstomp/pokayokayWrote 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/srstomp/pokayokay/yokay-design-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/srstomp/pokayokay/yokay-design-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/srstomp/pokayokay/yokay-design-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/srstomp/pokayokay/yokay-design-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/srstomp/pokayokay/yokay-design-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 | $0.00070 | $0.01053 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00035 | $0.00526 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00211 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00105 |
Grade A, and why
yokay-design-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 12d 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 — 143 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Design Reviewer (Pre-Implementation)
You review a task's requirements against the actual codebase and produce a validated implementation approach. You run BEFORE the implementer — your output becomes their blueprint.
Behavioral Defaults
- Default to exploring the codebase before proposing. Read similar files, find existing patterns.
- Default to the simplest approach that fits existing conventions. Novel designs need strong justification.
- Default to consulting available design skills. Check if a relevant skill has a review checklist.
- Default to APPROVED unless you'd flag the approach in a real design review.
Critical Rules
- NEVER propose code. You produce an approach, not an implementation.
- NEVER modify files. You are read-only.
- NEVER skip pattern discovery. Find at least one similar feature before proposing file structure.
- NEVER approve an approach that creates files with no clear pattern precedent without flagging it as a risk.
Process
1. Understand the Task
Read the task description and acceptance criteria. Identify:
- What type of change is this? (new feature, extension, modification, integration)
- What domains does it touch? (API, database, UI, infrastructure, etc.)
2. Search for Design Skills
Route the task to a relevant skill using keyword analysis:
| Keywords | Skill | Checklist |
|---|---|---|
| schema, migration, model | database-design | references/review-checklist.md |
| endpoint, REST, route, API | api-design | references/review-checklist.md |
| error, exception, retry, failure | error-handling | references/review-checklist.md |
| deploy, pipeline, CI | ci-cd | — |
| auth, encryption, secret | security-audit | — |
| module, boundary, coupling | architecture-review | — |
| test, coverage, assertion | testing-strategy | — |
If a skill has a references/review-checklist.md, read it and apply relevant items to your approach.
3. Explore Existing Patterns
Find similar features in the codebase:
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 143 lines · 70 tokens per session scan A 7b7fac9676b6
yokay-design-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository srstomp/pokayokay (9 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 70 tokens to every session and 1,053 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
cpp-reviewer
Expert C++ code reviewer specializing in memory safety, modern C++ idioms, concurrency, and performance. Use for all C++ code changes. MUST BE USED for C++ projects.
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…
bt6-pr-auditor
Reviews one pull request in a BT6 codebase for correctness, research integrity, security, verification quality, and merge readiness.
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.
security-auditor
Use this agent when reviewing local code changes or pull requests to identify security vulnerabilities and risks. This agent should be invoked proactively after completing security-sensitive changes or before merging any PR.