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/yonatangross/orchestkitWrote 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/yonatangross/orchestkit/design-to-code)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/yonatangross/orchestkit/design-to-code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/yonatangross/orchestkit/design-to-code/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/yonatangross/orchestkit/design-to-code"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/yonatangross/orchestkit/design-to-code.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 | $0.00086 | $0.03928 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00034 | $0.01571 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00786 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00393 |
Grade A, and why
design-to-code 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 20d 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 — 343 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Auto-generated from skills/design-to-code/SKILL.md
Source: https://github.com/yonatangross/orchestkit
Design to Code
Convert visual designs into production-ready React components using a four-stage pipeline: Extract, Match, Adapt, Render.
design-to-code screenshot of hero section # From description
design-to-code /tmp/mockup.png # From screenshot
design-to-code https://example.com/pricing # From URL
Pipeline Overview
Input (screenshot/description/URL)
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────┐
│ Stage 1: EXTRACT │ Stitch MCP → screen details + URLs
│ generate_screen_from_text│ Create screens from a text prompt
│ get_screen │ Screen details with download URLs
└─────────┬───────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────┐
│ Stage 2: MATCH │ 1. Storybook MCP → check existing
│ Storybook-first lookup │ 2. 21st.dev → search public registry
│ Then 21st.dev fallback │ 3. Filesystem → grep codebase
└─────────┬───────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────┐
│ Stage 3: ADAPT │ Merge extracted design + matched
│ Apply project tokens │ components into final implementation
│ Customize to codebase │ Tests + types included
└─────────┬───────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────┐
│ Stage 4: RENDER │ Register as json-render catalog entry
│ Generate Zod schema │ Same component → PDF, email, video
│ Add to defineCatalog() │ Multi-surface reuse via MCP output
└─────────┬───────────────┘
│
▼
┌─────────────────────────┐
│ Stage 4b: VERIFY │ Storybook MCP → self-healing loop
│ run-story-tests(a11y) │ Fix violations, retry (max 3)
│ preview-stories │ Embed live preview in chat
└─────────────────────────┘
Argument Resolution
INPUT = "" # Full argument string
# Detect input type:
# - Starts with "/" or "~" or contains ".png"/".jpg" → screenshot file path
# - Starts with "http" → URL to screenshot or live page
# - Otherwise → natural language description
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.
- 20d ago Changed dd1bdd218a6d
- 26d ago Changed · +10 lines 937c1e143c15
- 27d ago Changed 08ec63918123
- 1mo ago Changed ffa9ff9cf881
- 1mo ago First seen · 333 lines · 86 tokens per session scan A 99640d00fce1
design-to-code is a command published in the GitHub repository yonatangross/orchestkit (297 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 86 tokens to every session and 3,928 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
storybook-story
Génération Story Storybook.
pn-audit-typography
Surgical frontend typography audit — type scale, font choices, loading strategy, hierarchy, and accessibility. Standalone or chained by pn-frontend-audit.
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.
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.