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/AgentsORG/design-engineeringWrote 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/agentsorg/design-engineering/review-ui)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/agentsorg/design-engineering/review-ui"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/agentsorg/design-engineering/review-ui/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/commands/agentsorg/design-engineering/review-ui"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/agentsorg/design-engineering/review-ui.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 | $0.00029 | $0.00167 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00067 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00033 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00017 |
Grade A, and why
review-ui 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 1mo 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.
What it actually says
Review UI
Spawn or emulate the ui-reviewer subagent (agents/ui-reviewer.md).
- Load
skills/design-engineering/references/meta/review-format.md,review-checklist.md,gotchas.md, andpov.md. - Read the UI code the user pointed at (selection, file, or diff).
- Return only the Before | After | Why table (three to five rows max). Every Why ends with a
[[wikilink]]. - If nothing fails the checklist, say so in one sentence.
Do not add prose around the table unless the user asked for narrative.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 16 lines · 29 tokens per session scan A ac04e25b3c4d
review-ui is a command published in the GitHub repository AgentsORG/design-engineering (34 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 29 tokens to every session and 167 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
verify-design
Carefully and systematically review the provided design document to verify it is consistent, aligned with the current codebase, and free of meaningful gaps. Fix everything you can, then ask about the rest.
design-system-review
Analyze design token usage and component consistency.
refactor-clean
Refactor provided code for cleanliness, maintainability, and alignment with SOLID principles and modern best practices — no over-engineering.
ingest-cwe-taxonomies
Ingest CWE XML from MITRE and generate per-domain security audit taxonomies for PromptKit.
critique-screen
Run all seven visual critiques on a screen and output a prioritised fix list.
design-onboarding
Design a first-run experience end to end — activation path, progressive disclosure, and time to first value.