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/muminur/frontend-design-craft-skill/extractgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Muminur/frontend-design-craft-skillWrote 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/muminur/frontend-design-craft-skill/extract)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/muminur/frontend-design-craft-skill/extract"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/muminur/frontend-design-craft-skill/extract.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 | $0.00009 | $0.00412 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00206 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00082 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00041 |
Grade A, and why
extract 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.
What it actually says
/extract
Find duplicated patterns and lift them into shared components, design tokens, or utility classes.
Target
$ARGUMENTS
Procedure
- Scan for repetition. Look for:
- The same JSX/HTML structure with minor variations (3+ instances)
- The same set of Tailwind utility classes used together repeatedly
- The same color literal appearing in multiple places
- The same spacing combination (
pt-4 pb-6 px-8) repeated - The same animation config (duration, easing) repeated
- Promote to tokens. For values used 3+ times:
- Colors → CSS custom properties in
:root - Spacing → design tokens or theme extensions
- Type → CSS variables or theme tokens
- Animation timings/easings → tokens
- Colors → CSS custom properties in
- Promote to components. For JSX structures used 3+ times:
- Extract to a single component with props for the variation
- Place in a logical directory (
components/ui/,components/marketing/, etc.) - Use the same naming convention as the existing codebase
- Preserve flexibility. Do not over-abstract. A component used twice in slightly different ways often should stay duplicated. Abstract only when the cost of duplication is real.
- Update consumers. Rewrite all callsites to use the new tokens/components. Verify visual parity before claiming done.
Output
## Extract complete
**New tokens:**
- [name → value, used in N places]
**New components:**
- [Name (props) — used in N places]
**Files modified:** [list]
**Visual changes:** None (or note any intentional changes)
If any extraction would change visible output, call it out explicitly. The user should expect visual parity by default.
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 · 50 lines · 9 tokens per session scan A f90b81965706
extract is a command published in the GitHub repository Muminur/frontend-design-craft-skill (4 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 9 tokens to every session and 412 once invoked, about $0.0000 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
/a11y-audit
Auditoría de accesibilidad WCAG 2.2 completa con escaneo de HTML/componentes. Detecta: alt text faltante, problemas de contraste, navegación por teclado, etiquetas ARIA, gestión de focus, jerarquía de encabezados, etiquetas de formularios. Genera reporte accionable con instrucciones de remediación.
ux-recommend
The v2 flagship. Runs the 5-parallel-search Python engine across 11 data manifests (75+ styles, 170+ palettes, 65+ type pairs, 120+ components, 170+ industries, 110+ UX laws, 50+ motion presets, 120+ anti-patterns, 92 brand specs) and returns a complete recommended design system for your project — with always-on…
review-css-complexity
Scan codebase for overly complex CSS/styling patterns that should be simplified.
color-specialist
Use when colour is failing. Contrast below AA, a palette with no system behind it, dark mode that is only inverted light mode, or semantic colours that carry no meaning.
responsive-design-specialist
Use when a layout breaks between sizes. Arbitrary breakpoints, type that does not scale, images that blow out the grid, or a desktop design retrofitted onto mobile.
wcag-audit
Accessibility audit based on WCAG 2.1/2.2 and the axe-core reference.