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 skills add adamwstauffer/shidler --skill design-critiquegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/adamwstauffer/shidlerWrote 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/skills/adamwstauffer/shidler/design-critique)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/adamwstauffer/shidler/design-critique"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/adamwstauffer/shidler/design-critique/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/skills/adamwstauffer/shidler/design-critique"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/adamwstauffer/shidler/design-critique.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 | $0.00093 | $0.01008 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00046 | $0.00504 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00019 | $0.00202 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00101 |
Grade A, and why
design-critique 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 11d 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 — 58 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Design Critique Skill (UH Mānoa brand-anchored)
Critique a branded artifact against this repo's brand system and flag the generic patterns that make materials look machine-made rather than institutionally on-brand. Advisory only — you report and prioritize; the user applies the fixes.
Brand anchor (the ground truth)
Read docs/_branding/design.json for the full token set; use docs/_branding/design-system.html as the visual reference. If creating rather than critiquing, defer to the brand-guidelines skill. Load-bearing values (from CLAUDE.md → verify against design.json, which wins on conflict):
- Primary: UH Green
#024731— logos, headings, accents. - Secondary: Black
#000000— body text, borders. - Typography: Open Sans (Bold headings, Regular body); Avenir for print.
- Accessibility: ADA-compliant contrast ratios required; minimum 10pt body text.
Input modes (auto-detect from the argument shape)
- File mode — a path to an
.html,.md, or an unpacked/described Office artifact. Read it directly; for.pptx/.docx/.pdfuse thepptx/docx/pdfskills to extract structure and text. - Live mode — a
http(s)://orlocalhost:URL. Fetch and inspect the rendered page.
Scoring — five UH-anchored dimensions (0–5 each)
| Dimension | What earns a high score |
|---|---|
| Brand fidelity | Uses #024731 UH Green and the correct type families where the tokens prescribe; no off-palette accent colors |
| Contrast & accessibility | Text/background pairs meet ADA contrast; body text ≥ 10pt; not relying on color alone to convey meaning |
| Hierarchy & restraint | Clear heading levels; whitespace used deliberately; not every element competing for attention |
| Voice & specificity | Concrete, figure-cited copy (the writing-style convention: lead with a tight executive summary, active voice); not vague filler |
| Institutional fit | Reads as a Shidler / UH Mānoa course artifact, not a generic template |
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 58 lines · 93 tokens per session scan A 9b3f2d8d63ac
design-critique is a skill published in the GitHub repository adamwstauffer/shidler (10 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 93 tokens to every session and 1,008 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
design-is
Audit a design against Dieter Rams' ten "Good design is..." principles, then hand off a /make-plan prompt for one of three outcomes — new design, refine design, or redesign. Use when the user says "audit this design", "design review", "check this UI against Rams", "is this UI good", "critique this design", "design…
critique-theater
Five-dimension design quality review — score the artifact against craft, brand, accessibility, and copy, then fix what falls short before handing it over.
ss-lint
Quick automated lint — detects common design system violations in seconds.
nw-fp-usable-design
Naming conventions, API ergonomics, and usability patterns for functional code.
code-quality-principles
Applies KISS, YAGNI, and SOLID principles for clean code with reduced complexity. Use when refactoring or reviewing code for over-engineering.
ss-review
Review UI code for design system compliance, accessibility, and best practices.