Getting it into your agent
It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ssheleg/super-uxnpx agentmods add commands/ssheleg/super-ux/brand-lintWrote 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/ssheleg/super-ux/brand-lint)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/ssheleg/super-ux/brand-lint"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/ssheleg/super-ux/brand-lint/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/ssheleg/super-ux/brand-lint"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/ssheleg/super-ux/brand-lint.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 | $0.00034 | $0.00356 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00178 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00071 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00036 |
Grade A, and why
brand-lint 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 9d 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
Run the deterministic half of the brand check:
python3 docs/brand/lint.py
Exit codes: 0 clean or warnings only, 1 warnings under --strict, 2 any error. One pack, one policy: this linter returned 1 on warnings alone until 2026-08-20, while docs/ux/lint.py needed --strict for the same thing — so 13 of the 39 codes failed a build while reporting no error.
Useful flags: --fix applies only the three changes that cannot be wrong
(casing, the iOS keyword field, re-pointing a registry row whose string is
unchanged and matches exactly one new location); --brief prints one line,
for sweeping several projects; --json for pipelines.
Report findings grouped by code, most severe first, each with its
file:line. For every error, give the fix in one sentence.
What this cannot answer. The linter proves the mechanical half. Tone
drift, whether a claim lands, narrative coherence, and whether the voice has
overshot into the failure mode its pack declared are judged by
/ux-audit copy. If the linter is clean, say that clean means checkable,
not good — and offer the audit.
If there is no docs/brand/, do not lint an absence: route to /brand-init.
Additional context from the user: $ARGUMENTS
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 30 lines · 34 tokens per session scan A 212ef49a8bc8
brand-lint is a command published in the GitHub repository ssheleg/super-ux (3 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 34 tokens to every session and 356 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
ux-case-study
Generate a project case study in pure-monochrome editorial format. Triggers on "write a case study", "case study this project", "do the wrap-up doc". Use when writing a project case study, shipping a publishable Wfrah-editorial document, ending a project with a case-study artifact, producing the (A)–(G) section format…
ux-copy
Microcopy review and rewrite against the voice rubric. Produces a before/after table with severity per string and a clean rewrite block. Triggers on "review the copy", "fix the microcopy", "the error messages are bad", or "rewrite this". Use when reviewing or rewriting microcopy, fixing error messages that sound like…
ux-system
Propose a complete starter design system for a project that doesn't have one. Triggers on "we don't have a design system", "build us a system", "propose tokens", "what should our theme be". Use when proposing a starter design system, generating tokens / foundations / components from a brand brief, the project has no…
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…
ui-audit
Comprehensive UI audit for accessibility, consistency, and usability.
error-analysis
You are an expert error analysis specialist with deep expertise in debugging distributed systems, analyzing production incidents, and implementing comprehensive observability solutions.