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 chipi/agentic-ai-homelab --skill ux-baseline-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/chipi/agentic-ai-homelabWrote 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/chipi/agentic-ai-homelab/ux-baseline-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/chipi/agentic-ai-homelab/ux-baseline-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/chipi/agentic-ai-homelab/ux-baseline-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/chipi/agentic-ai-homelab/ux-baseline-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/chipi/agentic-ai-homelab/ux-baseline-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 | $0.00122 | $0.02630 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00049 | $0.01052 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00024 | $0.00526 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00263 |
Grade A, and why
ux-baseline-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 today.
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 — 166 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
ux-baseline-review
A playbook for one agent session (with background agents where noted) to take an app from "we think the UX has problems" to approved, recorded, prototyped changes. It was first run end to end on a Vue + Tailwind + Capacitor app over 2026-10-31 … 2026-11-03: a baseline, two reviews, 14 decisions and four prototype rounds. Hand it the project's repo path and one line on what the operator wants reviewed.
What it produces
- A UX baseline: a clickable mockup of every screen with real data, painted by the app's own styles, plus the documents and guards that keep it true.
- A review by independent reviewers, verified and merged into one set of findings, and a plan of action.
- Decisions, recorded one per decision, and prototypes of the structural ones as before/after variants, in a guided review the operator approves change by change, round by round.
- A record of each step, and a change inventory from which PRDs, specs, RFCs and ADRs are written later.
Work with the operator, not for them: decisions are theirs, recorded with their go, and they review. Ask before anything that installs, publishes, pushes or touches production.
Phase 0 — orient (bounded: do it, then report)
- Read the repo's AGENTS/CLAUDE files, the UX specs (whatever the project calls them), the PRD or product docs (personas, success metrics), and how the app is run and tested.
- Get the app running locally against fixture data. Run the tests once so the starting state is known.
- Report the layout and ask for the target before building anything.
Phase 1 — see the real app
- Screenshot inventory (one background agent): every route and state, phone (e.g. Pixel 7, 412×915) and desktop (1440×900), signed in with realistic seeded state; an index of what rendered, what was empty and why. This is the reference the mockup is compared against.
- Real data (one background agent): a compact snapshot from production through read-only tools, never invented. Write where every section came from and every gap. Ask before committing production data, even to a private repo, and record the answer.
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- today First seen · 166 lines · 122 tokens per session scan A fbaaead50224
ux-baseline-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository chipi/agentic-ai-homelab (3 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 122 tokens to every session and 2,630 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-11-04.
Other skills, from other repositories
sage-review
Deep, platform-neutral code review for PRs and CRs in ONE thorough single pass — design reasoning (Problem Worth Solving & Solution Fit) as one dimension alongside the 9 code-level dimensions, with chain-of-consequences, self-critique, and draft-only comments. The single app-owned source of truth.
nw-fp-usable-design
Naming conventions, API ergonomics, and usability patterns for functional code.
demand-elegance
Challenges hacky fixes on non-trivial changes.
design-review
Use when the user wants to evaluate something that ALREADY EXISTS rather than build something new — "review this", "audit this screen", "what's wrong with this page", "is this accessible?", or when they share a screenshot, URL, or existing code/markup. Runs the existing reviewers (design-critic…
issue-triage
Triage a repository's whole open issue backlog into themes and act on it behind one approved plan.
review-animations
Reviews animation and motion code against a high craft bar derived from Emil Kowalski's design engineering philosophy. Default to flagging; approval is earned.