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/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/thewaywithin/agent-11/design-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/thewaywithin/agent-11/design-review.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 | $0.00025 | $0.01268 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00507 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $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 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.
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.
- 1mo 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 (17 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 25 tokens to every session and 1,268 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 2026-09-04.
Other commands, from other repositories
muggle-ai-teams
Adaptive agent team orchestration. Coordinates Frontend Engineer, Backend Engineer, General Engineer, UX Reviewer, and Reviewer agents through design, implementation, review, and learning phases.
multi-execute
Multi-model collaborative execution — route tasks to Codex (backend) and/or Gemini (frontend), acquire prototypes, refactor to production-grade, and audit with dual-model review.
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.