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/volomydyr/design-engineer-plugin/reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/volomydyr/design-engineer-pluginWrote 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/volomydyr/design-engineer-plugin/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/volomydyr/design-engineer-plugin/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/volomydyr/design-engineer-plugin/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 | $0.00053 | $0.04032 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00026 | $0.02016 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00806 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00403 |
Grade A, and why
design-engineer: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 4d 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 316 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Design Review
Plugin paths
Your conversation context contains a line DESIGN_ENGINEER_PLUGIN_ROOT: <absolute path> injected by the plugin's UserPromptSubmit hook. Whenever this command references ${DESIGN_ENGINEER_PLUGIN_ROOT}/..., substitute the absolute path from that context line. No shell commands are run from this command body.
Spacer rule (per CLAUDE.md rule #6): Before every
AskUserQuestiontool call this command makes, end the preceding chat message with the canonical 3-horizontal-rule spacer (three lines of─characters). This applies to every option set described in this command body.
Context
#$ARGUMENTS
Note: existing-codebase component gallery (auto-scaffold)
If the project has UI components but no gallery yet, design-system-auditor will auto-scaffold one transparently during this review (v4.6.0 transparent infrastructure – no menu, no permission ask). The gallery is a single-page visual catalog of every component, all variants, real production styles, source-path labels – useful here for redundancy detection on existing codebases.
Argument routing
If $ARGUMENTS is audit, jump to Step A1: Page-by-page commercial audit below. Otherwise proceed to Step 1.
Step 1: Read project context
Before asking anything or starting work:
- Read
.design-engineer-plugin/config.yamlfor mode (guided/autopilot) and goal - Check what tools are available (is Figma connected? is Playwright available?)
- Scan the project briefly: what tech stack, what files exist, are there components, is there a design system?
Step 2: Plan the review
Based on what you found, present ALL available review areas as text:
Here's what I can review for your project:
**Core areas:**
- UX and usability – interaction flows, navigation, state handling, error states
- Visual quality – spacing, typography, color, alignment, polish
- Accessibility – WCAG compliance, keyboard navigation, screen readers
- Design system compliance – token usage, component reuse, naming patterns
**Additional areas:**
- Figma comparison – compare implementation against Figma designs side by side
- Psychology scan – cognitive load, decision fatigue, trust signals, behavioral patterns
- Ethics review – dark patterns, informed consent, data transparency
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 316 lines · 53 tokens per session scan A fce37b563613
design-engineer:review is a command published in the GitHub repository volomydyr/design-engineer-plugin (19 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 53 tokens to every session and 4,032 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
git
Git operations with intelligent commit messages and workflow optimization.
checklist
Generate a custom checklist for the current feature based on user requirements.
clarify
Identify underspecified areas in the current feature spec by asking up to 5 highly targeted clarification questions and encoding answers back into the spec.
specify
Create or update the feature specification from a natural language feature description.
analyze
Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.
converge
Assess the current codebase against the feature's spec, plan, and tasks, then append any remaining unbuilt work as new tasks to tasks.md so implement can complete it.