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.
npx agentmods add commands/adilkalam/orca/design-critiquegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/adilkalam/orcaWrote 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/commands/adilkalam/orca/design-critique)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/adilkalam/orca/design-critique"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/adilkalam/orca/design-critique.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00063 | $0.01079 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00032 | $0.00540 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00216 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00108 |
Grade A, and why
design-critique 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 5d 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 — 58 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/design-critique
Entry: mandatory skill loading
Target routing (#PATH_DECISION — one rule, not 5 copies): apply ~/.claude/docs/concepts/ios-design-contract/target-routing.md. If the TARGET ends in .swift, load Skill("ios-impeccable-hub") in place of impeccable-hub and run the Swift detector in Assessment B; otherwise keep the CSS/web path unchanged.
Before any work, invoke:
Skill("impeccable-hub")— the aesthetic (felt-state spine + banned rules + preferences + voice-anchors + detector floor). Baseline for every invocation; drives Assessment C (persona red-flags) via itsinterfaces-that-feelspine. For a.swifttarget, loadSkill("ios-impeccable-hub")instead (SwiftUI banned rules + preferences + the iOS detector contract) — see the routing rule above.Skill("critique")— the critique skill's review procedure, persona testing, scoring.
Context gathering
Read the current project's .claude/PRODUCT.md (strategic register) and .claude/DESIGN.md (visual contract). If absent, do NOT block — run the critique on the hub's global aesthetic (banned rules + preferences + voice-anchors) and note once: "No project contract found — critiquing against the global aesthetic; run /impeccable --teach to make this project-specific."
Read the global catalog references:
~/.claude/docs/concepts/design-contract/banned/— the anti-pattern files drive the extended DON'T list.~/.claude/docs/concepts/design-contract/voice-anchors.md— the aesthetic's heart; inform hierarchy and tone judgments against it.~/.claude/docs/concepts/design-contract/preferences/— positive-move catalogs to assess against (what should have been reached for).
Work
Three assessments in order:
Assessment A — LLM review (from the critique skill). Visual hierarchy, information architecture, emotional resonance, cognitive load. Apply Bakaus's extended DON'T list AND Adil's refusals catalog (the banned rules). Cite specific banned-rule files when flagging issues.
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 58 lines · 63 tokens per session scan A 9d799d87a439
design-critique is a command published in the GitHub repository adilkalam/orca (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 63 tokens to every session and 1,079 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 commands, from other repositories
checklist
Generate a custom checklist for the current feature based on user requirements.
clarify
Identify underspecified areas in the current feature spec by asking up to 5 highly targeted clarification questions and encoding answers back into the spec.
specify
Create or update the feature specification from a natural language feature description.
analyze
Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.
converge
Assess the current codebase against the feature's spec, plan, and tasks, then append any remaining unbuilt work as new tasks to tasks.md so implement can complete it.
implement
Execute the implementation plan by processing and executing all tasks defined in tasks.md.