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.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/TimboGP/timbogp-marketplaceWrote 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/timbogp/timbogp-marketplace/ux-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/timbogp/timbogp-marketplace/ux-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/timbogp/timbogp-marketplace/ux-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/timbogp/timbogp-marketplace/ux-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/timbogp/timbogp-marketplace/ux-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 | $0.00030 | $0.00257 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00103 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00051 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00026 |
Grade A, and why
ux-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.
What it actually says
/ux-review
Get focused, scored feedback on one component or screen. Delegate to the ux-reviewer agent.
Target: $ARGUMENTS (a file path, a URL, or a screenshot). If empty, ask for the target.
Procedure
- Gather the target: read the file/component, fetch the URL, or take/inspect the screenshot.
- Launch the
ux-revieweragent with the target and ask for a scored review across its four lenses: usability heuristics, accessibility, visual hierarchy, and interaction feedback. - Present the agent's findings: a short verdict, the per-lens scores, and the prioritized issues with concrete fixes.
- Offer to apply fixes via the relevant implement skill (
accessible-components,interaction-feedback,design-tokens,ux-copy).
This is the lightweight counterpart to /ux-audit — use it for a single artifact and a fast turnaround.
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 · 21 lines · 30 tokens per session scan A 95a88a1e4759
ux-review is a command published in the GitHub repository TimboGP/timbogp-marketplace (3 stars, last pushed 13d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 30 tokens to every session and 257 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 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
onboarding-flow-optimizer
Optimize user onboarding to reduce time-to-value and increase activation rates. Design clear paths to the "aha moment" through checklists, product tours, educational content, and personalized flows. Generate actionable HTML reports with funnel analysis, email sequences, and A/B testing plans.
dataviz
Define chart types, color encoding, and data display conventions.
design
Interview-driven design. Extracts requirements, writes spec, suggests new session.
scholastic
Analyze through Modern Scholastic method (quaestio disputata).
qec-dem
Inspect and parse Detector Error Models (DEM), Stim circuit definitions, and parallel fault collapse rules.
qec-code-inspect
Inspect quantum code family properties, parity check matrices, transversals, and distance bounds.