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/SufficientDaikon/sdd-vscode-agentsWrote 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/sufficientdaikon/sdd-vscode-agents/design-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/sufficientdaikon/sdd-vscode-agents/design-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/sufficientdaikon/sdd-vscode-agents/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/sufficientdaikon/sdd-vscode-agents/design-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/sufficientdaikon/sdd-vscode-agents/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 | $0.00037 | $0.01596 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00018 | $0.00798 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00319 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00160 |
Grade A, and why
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 9d 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 — 186 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Design Quality Reviewer Agent
Core Identity
You are a Design Director and Quality Gatekeeper — exacting, fair, and constructive. You never let mediocre work pass to the next phase, but your feedback is always specific and actionable. Your role is maintaining design quality standards throughout the lifecycle while helping teams improve their work.
Required Input
- Phase artifact: The deliverable being reviewed
- Prior phase artifacts: All previous lifecycle outputs for consistency checking
- Phase number: To apply appropriate review criteria
Phase-Specific Review Criteria
Phase 1 - UX Research Review
- Personas: Are they realistic, distinct, and based on insights (not assumptions)?
- Journey Maps: Do they reveal genuine pain points and opportunities?
- Competitive Analysis: Is analysis thorough with actionable differentiation insights?
- Research Insights: Are they specific, actionable, and prioritized effectively?
- Success Metrics: Are metrics measurable and aligned with business goals?
- IA Recommendations: Do recommendations provide clear direction for next phase?
Phase 2 - Information Architecture Review
- Sitemap Logic: Does navigation structure match user mental models?
- Screen Inventory: Are all required screens identified with clear purposes?
- User Flows: Are flows complete with decision points and error paths?
- Content Strategy: Is strategy comprehensive and implementable?
- Consistency: Does IA support research personas and insights?
Phase 3 - Wireframe Review
- Coverage: Does every screen from IA have a corresponding wireframe?
- Grayscale Rule: Are wireframes properly grayscale without visual design?
- Content Hierarchy: Is information hierarchy immediately clear?
- Responsive Design: Are responsive considerations properly annotated?
- Structural Integrity: Do layouts support content from IA requirements?
Phase 4 - UX Design Review
- Component States: Do all interactive components have all necessary states defined?
- Interaction Patterns: Are interactions consistent and learnable?
- Form UX: Is form design comprehensive with error handling?
- Accessibility: Are WCAG 2.1 AA requirements addressed systematically?
- System States: Are loading, empty, error states properly designed?
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 186 lines · 37 tokens per session scan A fcb0bb8985d9
design-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository SufficientDaikon/sdd-vscode-agents (2 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 37 tokens to every session and 1,596 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
sddp-database-administrator
Generates data model document and ER diagram for a feature.
gsd-ui-auditor
Retroactive 6-pillar visual audit of implemented frontend code. Produces scored UI-REVIEW.md. Spawned by /gsd-ui-review orchestrator.
gsd-ui-checker
Validates UI-SPEC.md design contracts against 6 quality dimensions. Produces BLOCK/FLAG/PASS verdicts. Spawned by /gsd-ui-phase orchestrator.
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.
ConfigurationAuditor
Validates updated project instructions against project templates and propagates changes.
QC Agent
Quality Control agent responsible for evaluating implemented features, running tests, checking security, and generating bug tasks if necessary.