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 skills/ceilf6/frontagent/frontend-reviewernpx skills add ceilf6/FrontAgent --skill frontend-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ceilf6/FrontAgentWrote 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/ceilf6/frontagent/frontend-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/ceilf6/frontagent/frontend-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/ceilf6/frontagent/frontend-reviewer.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 5.1 | $0.00060 | $0.00429 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00030 | $0.00215 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00086 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00043 |
Grade A, and why
frontend-reviewer 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 6d 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
Frontend Reviewer
Review relevant frontend files and produce concrete findings ordered by severity. Keep the review evidence-based, concise, and actionable.
Workflow
- Read
references/severity-rubric.md. - Read
references/review-checklist.md. - Read
references/frontend-quality-rules.mdwhen architecture, layering, or maintainability questions matter. - Inspect only the files relevant to the request, the diff, or the changed surfaces implied by the task.
- Report findings grouped by severity, highest risk first.
- If no findings exist, state that explicitly and mention residual risks or testing gaps.
Output Contract
- Start with findings. Do not lead with a summary.
- For each finding include:
- affected file path
- optional line number when known
- severity
- why it matters
- shortest viable fix direction
- Prefer one issue per finding. Split unrelated problems.
- Use exact evidence. Avoid generic advice.
Guardrails
- Do not invent files, line numbers, or user intent.
- Do not upgrade style nits into blocking issues.
- Do not hide uncertainty. Mark assumptions when evidence is incomplete.
- Do not spend space on praise unless the user explicitly asks for it.
- Prefer behavioral regressions, data-flow bugs, accessibility issues, and missing tests over cosmetic commentary.
What ships with it
4 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 53 lines · 60 tokens per session scan A 526f533d5376
frontend-reviewer is a skill published in the GitHub repository ceilf6/FrontAgent (119 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 60 tokens to every session and 429 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 skills, from other repositories
code-review
Review frontend code for best practices, bugs, and improvements. Use when reviewing PRs, checking code quality, or before committing.
review-tanstack-router
TanStack Router review (file-based routing, route tree generation, typed search params, preload/lazy behavior) against current official TanStack Router best practices. USE WHEN: user runs /review-tanstack-router or explicitly asks for this review. DO NOT USE WHEN: reviewing app code, other dev dependencies, or…
review-vite
Vite setup review (front-app vite.config.ts, build/performance options, @cloudflare/vite-plugin, devtools) against current official Vite best practices. USE WHEN: user runs /review-vite or explicitly asks for this review. DO NOT USE WHEN: reviewing app code, other dev dependencies, or implementing features.
review-react
React 19 review (front-app patterns, compiler readiness, Suspense boundaries, hooks discipline) against current official React best practices. USE WHEN: user runs /review-react or explicitly asks for this review. DO NOT USE WHEN: reviewing app code, other dev dependencies, or implementing features.
review-tailwind
Tailwind CSS v4 review (CSS-first config, Vite plugin integration, better-tailwindcss lint rules) against current official Tailwind best practices. USE WHEN: user runs /review-tailwind or explicitly asks for this review. DO NOT USE WHEN: reviewing app code, other dev dependencies, or implementing features.
review-tanstack-query
TanStack Query review (queryOptions patterns, cache hygiene, mutation flows, devtools) against current official TanStack Query best practices. USE WHEN: user runs /review-tanstack-query or explicitly asks for this review. DO NOT USE WHEN: reviewing app code, other dev dependencies, or implementing features.