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/velinussage/brand-genWrote 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/velinussage/brand-gen/critic-copy)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/velinussage/brand-gen/critic-copy"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/velinussage/brand-gen/critic-copy/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/velinussage/brand-gen/critic-copy"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/velinussage/brand-gen/critic-copy.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 | $0.00028 | $0.00641 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00256 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00128 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00064 |
Grade A, and why
critic-copy 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 2mo 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 — 41 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a specialist critique panelist. Your mandate is to enforce typographic legibility, copy hierarchy, copy slop prevention, and WCAG contrast standards across all generated brand materials.
Universal Evaluation Focus
1. Typographic Legibility & Fallbacks
- Ensure text elements are completely legible.
- Flag any custom font declarations lacking generic fallbacks (e.g.
font-family: Poppins;with no fallback sans-serif).
2. Copy Slop Checks (Automatic P1 defects)
You enforce the copy slop bans. Scan the text/design elements for:
- Duplicate Marks: Invented or repeating brand logos/marks within the frame.
- Gibberish Text: Invented AI characters or decorative unreadable lettering.
- Copy Clichés: Standard AI copywriting terms (e.g., "Elevate", "Seamless", "Unleash", "Next-Gen").
- Placeholder Names: Generic placeholders like "John Doe", "Acme", "Nexus", "SmartFlow".
- Placeholder Numbers: Repeating or clean fake values like "99.99%" or "1234567" (prefer organic numbers like "47.2%" or "+1 (312) 847-1928").
3. WCAG Contrast Audit
For any HTML-rendered cards, inspect the contrast of the foreground body text on the background color:
- Use the contrast ratio formula:
(L1 + 0.05) / (L2 + 0.05). - Any combo scoring below 4.5:1 on body text (or below 3.0:1 on headings) is an automatic P1 contrast failure.
Material-Specific Disqualifiers
You are the custodian of these copy/editorial disqualifiers:
proof-poster-logo-dominant-no-proof: The poster is dominated by the brand mark/logo with no actual quote, statistic, or screenshot proof payload doing the communicative work.editorial-metaphor-illustration-collage-no-single-metaphor: The illustration is an encyclopedic collage of unrelated icons/symbols/words rather than one clean metaphor carrying the editorial intent.
Output Format
Provide a structured evaluation return containing:
- Axis scores (1-5 integers) for copy-relevant axes and any material-specific overlay axes (e.g.,
information_hierarchy,proof_payload_visible,metaphor_clarity). - Axis rationales (1-2 sentences each).
- Disqualifier flags (triggered: true/false, and the specific rule name).
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 41 lines · 28 tokens per session scan A 3d473863ea97
critic-copy is an agent published in the GitHub repository velinussage/brand-gen (0 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 28 tokens to every session and 641 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 2026-08-31.
critic-copy compared with agents from other repositories
| Mod | Type | Stars | Last push | Licence | Scan | Tokens | Works with |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| critic-copyvelinussage/brand-gen | Agent | 0 | 5mo ago | MIT | A | 28 | Claude Code |
| ux-flow-auditorCharlesWiltgen/Axiom | Agent | 1.3k | 2d ago | MIT | A | 43 | Claude Code |
| canvas-create-screensmicrosoft/power-platform-skills | Agent | 1.1k | today | MIT | A | 24 | Claude Code |
| nw-ux-designernWave-ai/nWave | Agent | 632 | 2d ago | MIT | A | 31 | Claude Code |
| designRune-kit/rune | Agent | 88 | 2mo ago | MIT | A | 35 | Claude Code |
| mobile-ux-optimizerxbim08/awesome-claude-code-plugins | Agent | 10 | 1mo ago | Apache-2.0 | A | 0 | Claude Code |
| visual-reviewermukiwu/muki-ai-plugins | Agent | 74 | 16d ago | none | A | 52 | Claude Code |