Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to TheWayWithin/agent-11. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/TheWayWithin/agent-11/main/.claude/commands/design-review.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/TheWayWithin/agent-11Wrote 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/thewaywithin/agent-11/design-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/thewaywithin/agent-11/design-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/thewaywithin/agent-11/design-review.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 | $0.00025 | $0.01268 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00634 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00254 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00127 |
Grade A, and why
design-review 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 2d 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.
Copies of this mod
4 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:
- pragmatic-review — 86% identical, 126 lines differ
- recon — 84% identical, 126 lines differ
- minos — 84% identical, 152 lines differ
- design-review — 83% identical, 126 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 135 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
DESIGN REVIEW PROTOCOL ACTIVATION 🎨
You are executing a comprehensive design review using world-class standards from companies like Stripe, Airbnb, and Linear. Your mission is to ensure UI/UX excellence through systematic evaluation.
OPERATIONAL CONTEXT
GIT STATUS:
!`git status`
FILES MODIFIED:
!`git diff --name-only origin/HEAD...`
COMMITS:
!`git log --no-decorate --oneline -10 origin/HEAD...`
DIFF CONTENT:
!`git diff --merge-base origin/HEAD`
MISSION PARAMETERS
Review the complete diff above containing all UI/UX changes. Execute the comprehensive design review protocol to assess:
- Visual Consistency: Design system compliance, typography, spacing
- User Experience: Interaction patterns, user flows, conversion optimization
- Accessibility: WCAG AA+ compliance, keyboard navigation, screen readers
- Responsive Design: Mobile-first, cross-device compatibility
- Performance: Load times, animations, resource optimization
- Code Quality: Component reuse, design token usage, maintainability
EXECUTION DIRECTIVE
- Deploy @design-review agent with full systematic protocol
- Apply project standards from
/field-manual/ui-doctrine.mdif available - Use live environment for interactive testing (provide URL if needed)
- Execute all 7 phases of the design review protocol systematically
- Classify findings by severity: [BLOCKER], [HIGH-PRIORITY], [MEDIUM-PRIORITY], [NITPICK]
- Follow "Problems Over Prescriptions" communication approach
- Provide visual evidence via screenshots for all issues
REVIEW PHASES TO EXECUTE
Phase 0: Preparation (5 min)
- Analyze PR motivation and testing notes
- Set up Playwright environment
- Configure initial viewport (1440x900)
Phase 1: Interaction & User Flow (15 min)
- Test primary user flows
- Validate all interactive states
- Check micro-interactions and animations
- Assess perceived performance
Phase 2: Responsiveness Testing (10 min)
- Desktop (1440px) with screenshot
- Tablet (768px) layout adaptation
- Mobile (375px) touch optimization
- Breakpoint transition verification
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 135 lines · 25 tokens per session scan A 770517ad8be6
design-review is a command published in the GitHub repository TheWayWithin/agent-11 (15 stars, last pushed 14d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 25 tokens to every session and 1,268 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-04.
Other commands, from other repositories
design-import
Scaffolds React components from a Claude Design handoff bundle and stops at files on disk: no stories, no tests, no pull request. Use when handed a claude.ai/design URL or a local bundle file; when that same scaffold should carry on through test generation, browser verification and an opened PR, run /ork:design-ship…
design-ship
One-shot pipeline turning a claude.ai/design link into a pull request: scaffold via /ork:design-import, stories and specs via /ork:cover, browser verification via /ork:expect, then open the PR. Use when a design link should come back as a PR with no intermediate steps; if all you need is the components written to…
critique
Design lens critique covering visual hierarchy, clarity, and anti-slop patterns — produces a findings table, no code edits unless asked. Use when the user wants a design review, says "what's wrong with this UI", or needs a second opinion before a handoff or presentation.
audit
A project review command that checks both the user interface and the code. It can inspect design rules, accessibility, performance, security, and code quality at different levels of depth.
revisar
Peer review estricto de código con análisis de rendimiento, arquitectura, seguridad y cumplimiento. Usa cuando el usuario dice "revisar código", "code review", "peer review", "revisame este archivo", "review my code", "analizar código", "revisar PR", "revisar feature". Incluye análisis de performance, security OWASP…
dev-assess
Spawn 3 senior developer subagents in parallel, each assessing the target from a different engineering perspective. Experts are dynamically selected based on the target material's technical domains. Triangulate their findings into an interactive HTML artifact with convergence/divergence analysis.