Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add ZachArticulateV/designer-pro-and-seo/plugin install designer-pro-and-seoWrote 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/zacharticulatev/designer-pro-and-seo/design-visual-qa)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/zacharticulatev/designer-pro-and-seo/design-visual-qa"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/zacharticulatev/designer-pro-and-seo/design-visual-qa/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/zacharticulatev/designer-pro-and-seo/design-visual-qa"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/zacharticulatev/designer-pro-and-seo/design-visual-qa.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 | $0.00103 | $0.01402 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00051 | $0.00701 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00021 | $0.00280 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00140 |
Grade A, and why
design-visual-qa scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 11d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 102 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
design-visual-qa (dispatched-leaf agent)
Wraps: skills/design-visual-qa/SKILL.md — same method, no forked logic.
Method
Visual regression for the rendered surface — the visual analog of seo-drift. Probe
for the renderer, capture full-page screenshots after the page settles (network idle +
fonts + animations), then compare each shot to its stored baseline and grade the delta.
When no browser is available it can't capture pixels, so it hands back a structured
manual visual-QA checklist plus the one step to enable the free renderer — it never
just fails.
python3 "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/workflow/capability_probe.py" --human # detect Playwright + odiff/pixelmatch; use `py` on Windows
With the bundled Playwright extension connected, capture each (URL, viewport, browser)
and save baselines to visual-qa/baselines/ in the user's workspace; on a diff run,
compare against the baseline — an exact differ (odiff/pixelmatch) reports a
pixel-delta % and a highlighted diff image, otherwise Claude-vision names the changed
regions and whether each looks intentional. Grade every change against the four axes
(hierarchy, rhythm, contrast, restraint) and the severity ladder in
references/design-visual-qa/visual-qa-rubric.md: a large delta can be a deliberate
improvement, while a tiny delta that drops text below AA or hides a focus ring is a
critical regression. When only vision ran, never emit a fabricated pixel number.
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 102 lines · 103 tokens per session scan A 3ea569b378f1
design-visual-qa is an agent published in the GitHub repository ZachArticulateV/designer-pro-and-seo (8 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 103 tokens to every session and 1,402 once invoked, about $0.0005 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
qa-verifier
Use to independently verify a running frontend - drive key flows, assert ZERO browser console errors, run accessibility (WCAG AA) and Lighthouse checks, and confirm the UI matches DESIGN.md - then return a pass/fail report with evidence. Invoke before claiming a phase or the project "done".
frontend-evaluator
Frontend QA evaluator. Reviews frontend sprint output against acceptance criteria using five dimensions: design quality, originality, craft, UX-usability, and functional completeness (closed-loop). Interacts with the running app via browser automation to test real user flows and verifies feature loops close…
frontend-specialist
A frontend verification agent that tests changed user-interface code in a real browser with Playwright, including screenshots for visual checks.
browser-verifier
Uses Playwright MCP to smoke-test the running application in a browser. Dispatched by /ship for pass/fail verification.
wp-cf7
CF7 form specialist — generates contact forms, branded email templates, and creates forms via WP-CLI with bilingual support.
wp-audit-a11y
Accessibility auditor — WCAG 2.1 AA compliance, WordPress-specific checks, skip links, ARIA, keyboard navigation, color contrast.