design-qa

A browser-based design review process that inspects an app's visual and user-experience issues, records them as visible comments, and can apply fixes.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to review a running app, focus the review on a chosen area, list unresolved comments, or fix those comments in the code and mark them resolved.
Why use it?
It gives design problems a concrete location in the app and keeps the review and repair work connected through recorded comments.

Command

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add commands/devzonayed/mochi/design-qa
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/DevZonayed/Mochi
Per session 52 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 1,084 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00052 $0.01084
Opus 5 $0.00026 $0.00542
Sonnet 5 $0.00010 $0.00217
Haiku 4.5 $0.00005 $0.00108

Measured yesterday against content hash 7bfa7f7c380c, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

design-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 yesterday.

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.

plugins/qa/commands/design-qa.md · 44 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 44 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

You run a design-QA loop that bridges the browser MCP and Comment Mode. Comments the agent creates appear to the human as live pins in the Mochi extension (they share chrome.storage.local), and Comment Mode is auto-activated on the session tab so the pins show up without the human opening it first. Inspect $ARGUMENTS and pick a mode.

Same Chrome required. Pins are stored per Chrome profile. The human sees them only in the same Chrome the agent drove — i.e. the one whose Mochi extension is connected (auto-connect on). If the MCP auto-launched its own Chrome window, review the comments in that window, not a separate Chrome.

Mode: fix / list (when $ARGUMENTS starts with fix or list)

  1. browser_comment_list { sessionName } (pass the name after fix/list to scope; omit to list this site's sessions for the current tab).
  2. For list: print the comments grouped by route (n · route · selector · text · severity · resolved) and stop.
  3. For fix: for each unresolved comment, locate the code that renders selector on route, make the fix, and call browser_comment_resolve { id }. Work in dependency-safe order; commit logically. Report a summary (fixed / skipped + why). Do NOT mark resolved unless actually fixed.

Default mode: run the design-QA pass

1. Name the session meaningfully (project-wise, reflecting the latest changes). Run in the repo:

echo "$(basename "$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel 2>/dev/null || pwd)") · $(git rev-parse --abbrev-ref HEAD 2>/dev/null || echo main) — QA $(date +%Y-%m-%d)"

Use that string as sessionName for every browser_comment_add. (Re-running on the same branch/day appends to the same session.)

2. Open the app. Ensure a browser session: browser_session_start { url } (ask for / infer the dev URL, e.g. http://localhost:3000). Determine the routes to check — from $ARGUMENTS, the user, or by crawling visible links (browser_links).

3. For each route (and, when relevant, common breakpoints via browser_emulate_viewport — use widths that match the extension's device presets so pins are revealable in the device frame: 375, 390, 768, 1024, 1280, 1440; clear with browser_clear_emulation):

  • browser_navigate { url }, then browser_screenshot, browser_audit_interactives { scope:"all" }, and browser_assert_no_errors { sinceNavigation:true }.
  • Judge design/UX. Default heuristics: spacing/alignment/rhythm, visual hierarchy, contrast & legibility, overflow/clipping/truncation, broken or empty/loading/error states, responsive breakage at the current width, obvious accessibility (labels, alt text, focus, target size), and copy (typos, clarity, consistency). If $ARGUMENTS provides a focus (a checklist, a design system / Figma reference, or a scope like "mobile + forms only"), prioritize it and stay on-target.
  • For each issue: browser_comment_add { selector, text, sessionName, severity, breakpoint? }.
    • selector = a precise CSS selector for the element (use refs from browser_snapshot / browser_audit_interactives). Check the response's located: if it is false the selector didn't resolve — retry with a better selector so the pin lands on the real element.
    • text = a concrete, actionable instruction (what's wrong + the fix), not a vague observation.
    • severity = high | medium | low.
    • breakpoint = { label, width } when the issue is breakpoint-specific (use a preset width above so it's visible in the device frame).

Read the full file on GitHub · 44 lines

Changes

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.

  1. yesterday First seen · 44 lines · 52 tokens per session scan A 7bfa7f7c380c

Subscribe to this mod's changes

design-qa is a command published in the GitHub repository DevZonayed/Mochi (3 stars, last pushed 15d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 52 tokens to every session and 1,084 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.