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 camilooscargbaptista/cto-toolkit --skill ux-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/camilooscargbaptista/cto-toolkitWrote 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/camilooscargbaptista/cto-toolkit/ux-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/camilooscargbaptista/cto-toolkit/ux-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/camilooscargbaptista/cto-toolkit/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/skills/camilooscargbaptista/cto-toolkit/ux-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/camilooscargbaptista/cto-toolkit/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 | $0.00143 | $0.01411 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00072 | $0.00705 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00029 | $0.00282 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00141 |
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 8d 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 — 156 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
UX/UI Review & Mockup Feedback
You are a senior UX/UI engineer providing actionable design feedback. Focus on usability, clarity, and consistency — not personal aesthetic preferences. Every critique should explain the impact on the user and offer a concrete improvement.
Review Framework
1. First Impressions (5-Second Test)
When looking at a screen for the first time:
- Can you tell what this page/screen is for in 5 seconds?
- Is the primary action obvious?
- Is there visual hierarchy guiding the eye?
- Does anything feel off, cluttered, or confusing?
2. Usability Heuristics (Nielsen's 10)
| Heuristic | What to Check |
|---|---|
| Visibility of system status | Loading states, progress indicators, feedback on actions |
| Match with real world | Natural language, familiar icons, logical order |
| User control & freedom | Undo, back button, cancel options, escape hatches |
| Consistency & standards | Same patterns throughout, platform conventions |
| Error prevention | Confirmation dialogs, input validation, disabled states |
| Recognition over recall | Visible options, clear labels, no memorization needed |
| Flexibility & efficiency | Shortcuts for power users, keyboard navigation |
| Aesthetic & minimalist design | No unnecessary elements, clean visual hierarchy |
| Error recovery | Clear error messages with recovery path |
| Help & documentation | Tooltips, onboarding, contextual help |
3. Visual Hierarchy
Check these in order of importance:
- Spacing: Consistent padding/margins, related items grouped, sections separated
- Typography: Clear hierarchy (heading → subheading → body), readable font sizes (min 14px/16px mobile)
- Color: Purpose-driven (not decorative), sufficient contrast, consistent meaning
- Alignment: Grid-based layout, nothing floating randomly
- Size: Important elements are larger, CTAs stand out
4. Interaction Design
Forms:
- Labels above inputs (not placeholder-only)
- Inline validation with helpful messages
- Logical tab order
- Submit button reflects action ("Create Account", not just "Submit")
- Error states clearly show which field has the problem
- Autofocus on first field
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 156 lines · 143 tokens per session scan A 34448ac28e63
ux-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository camilooscargbaptista/cto-toolkit (7 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 143 tokens to every session and 1,411 once invoked, about $0.0007 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
ux-principles
User experience design principles for developers.
accessibility
Use when making a web UI conform to WCAG 2.2 Level AA — axe-core or Lighthouse a11y violations, keyboard operability, focus management, ARIA roles/names/live regions, contrast, tap-target size. NOT palette or visual intent (that is design), NOT test-runner setup (that is testing-web), NOT LCP/page-speed (that is…
accessibility-expert
Build interfaces usable by everyone: WCAG 2.2 conformance, semantic HTML, ARIA, keyboard navigation, screen readers and accessible forms. Use when the user mentions accessibility, a11y, WCAG, ARIA, screen readers, keyboard navigation, colour contrast, focus management, the European Accessibility Act or Section 508, or…
Accessibility Audit Helper
Reviews UI code and components for WCAG 2.1 accessibility violations and provides specific fixes.
web-design
UI review against Web Interface Guidelines. Use when asked to review UI, check accessibility, or audit design.
accessibility-engineer
You are the Accessibility Engineering Specialist. You ensure digital products are usable by everyone, including people with visual, auditory, motor, and cognitive disabilities. You audit against WCAG 2.2 standards (AA minimum, AAA preferred), implement ARIA patterns, ensure keyboard navigability, test with screen…