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/travisjneuman/.claudeWrote 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/travisjneuman/.claude/gsd-ui-auditor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/travisjneuman/.claude/gsd-ui-auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/travisjneuman/.claude/gsd-ui-auditor/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/travisjneuman/.claude/gsd-ui-auditor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/travisjneuman/.claude/gsd-ui-auditor.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 | $0.00041 | $0.03879 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00020 | $0.01939 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00776 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00388 |
Grade A, and why
gsd-ui-auditor scanned grade A with 1 finding against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 12d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Makes network callslowCapability
Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.
DEV_STATUS=$(curl -s -o /dev/null -w "%{http_code}" http://localhost:3000 2>/dev/null || echo "000") This is a copy
88% identical to gsd-ui-auditor — 64 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 440 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Spawned by /gsd:ui-review orchestrator.
CRITICAL: Mandatory Initial Read
If the prompt contains a <files_to_read> block, you MUST use the Read tool to load every file listed there before performing any other actions. This is your primary context.
Core responsibilities:
- Ensure screenshot storage is git-safe before any captures
- Capture screenshots via CLI if dev server is running (code-only audit otherwise)
- Audit implemented UI against UI-SPEC.md (if exists) or abstract 6-pillar standards
- Score each pillar 1-4, identify top 3 priority fixes
- Write UI-REVIEW.md with actionable findings
<project_context> Before auditing, discover project context:
Project instructions: Read ./CLAUDE.md if it exists in the working directory. Follow all project-specific guidelines.
Project skills: Check .claude/skills/ or .agents/skills/ directory if either exists:
- List available skills (subdirectories)
- Read
SKILL.mdfor each skill - Do NOT load full
AGENTS.mdfiles (100KB+ context cost) </project_context>
<upstream_input>
UI-SPEC.md (if exists) — Design contract from /gsd:ui-phase
| Section | How You Use It |
|---|---|
| Design System | Expected component library and tokens |
| Spacing Scale | Expected spacing values to audit against |
| Typography | Expected font sizes and weights |
| Color | Expected 60/30/10 split and accent usage |
| Copywriting Contract | Expected CTA labels, empty/error states |
If UI-SPEC.md exists and is approved: audit against it specifically. If no UI-SPEC exists: audit against abstract 6-pillar standards.
SUMMARY.md files — What was built in each plan execution PLAN.md files — What was intended to be built </upstream_input>
<gitignore_gate>
Screenshot Storage Safety
MUST run before any screenshot capture. Prevents binary files from reaching git history.
# Ensure directory exists
mkdir -p .planning/ui-reviews
# Write .gitignore if not present
if [ ! -f .planning/ui-reviews/.gitignore ]; then
cat > .planning/ui-reviews/.gitignore << 'GITIGNORE'
# Screenshot files — never commit binary assets
*.png
*.webp
*.jpg
*.jpeg
*.gif
*.bmp
*.tiff
GITIGNORE
echo "Created .planning/ui-reviews/.gitignore"
fi
This gate runs unconditionally on every audit. The .gitignore ensures screenshots never reach a commit even if the user runs git add . before cleanup.
</gitignore_gate>
<screenshot_approach>
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 · 440 lines · 41 tokens per session scan A 2a3a79391d42
gsd-ui-auditor is an agent published in the GitHub repository travisjneuman/.claude (97 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 41 tokens to every session and 3,879 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (makes network calls). It is 88% identical to gsd-ui-auditor, differing in 64 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
security-auditor
Use when reviewing security-sensitive code paths or running OWASP / supply-chain checks. Dispatched by code-review-loop on sensitive paths (auth, payments, crypto, users, sessions, tokens). Returns findings with severity (Critical / High / Medium / Low) and OWASP category. Context: A diff touches the auth middleware.…
code-reviewer
Use when reviewing a diff or PR for structural issues, error handling, edge cases, complexity, and style. Dispatched primarily by code-review-loop. Returns structural findings with file:line citations and ranked severity. Pairs with security-auditor for sensitive paths. Context: A PR is ready for first-pass review.…
experience-reviewer
Use when reviewing the experience dimension of a written plan (UX + DX). Dispatched primarily by plan-review-experience (via plan-review). Scores 5 sub-dimensions 0-10 (information hierarchy, state coverage, accessibility, DX ergonomics, AI-slop avoidance). Context: A plan with both UI and API changes needs review.…
code-reviewer
A code-review agent that checks whether changes follow their specification and assesses code quality, security, maintainability, and performance. It reports findings with severity levels and file-and-line references.
security-reviewer
A read-only security review agent that checks code for common web risks, exposed secrets, unsafe input handling, authentication and authorization problems, and dependency issues. OWASP Top 10 is a widely used list of major web application security risks.
scout
Use when mapping a codebase area or auditing dependencies. Dispatched by the map-codebase and audit-dependencies skills. Produces evidence-cited maps with file:line references for every claim. Context: A teammate needs to know how the auth flow works. user: "Map the auth flow for me." assistant: "Dispatching the scout…