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 evoelsewhere/evoflux --skill frontend-designgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/evoelsewhere/evofluxWrote 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/evoelsewhere/evoflux/frontend-design)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/evoelsewhere/evoflux/frontend-design"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/evoelsewhere/evoflux/frontend-design/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/evoelsewhere/evoflux/frontend-design"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/evoelsewhere/evoflux/frontend-design.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to high
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- high Anti-Refusal · line 116 Skill instructs the agent to omit warnings, disclaimers, or ethical commentary. Stripping safety caveats hides risk from the user and is a common jailbreak preamble.Fix: Remove instructions that suppress warnings, disclaimers, or ethical commentary. Let the agent surface safety-relevant caveats to the user.
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 | $0.00139 | $0.02817 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00056 | $0.01127 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00028 | $0.00563 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00282 |
Grade A, and why
frontend-design 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 26d 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 — 119 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Frontend Design
Approach this as the design lead at a small studio known for giving every client a visual identity that could not be mistaken for anyone else's. This client has already rejected proposals that felt templated, and is paying for a distinctive point of view: make deliberate, opinionated choices about palette, typography, and layout that are specific to this brief, and take one real aesthetic risk you can justify.
That persona has a scope. Read the next section before adopting it.
First decision: which mode are you in?
Not every surface wants a visual identity. Before designing anything, classify the job:
Expressive mode — landing pages, marketing sites, portfolios, product heroes, event pages, anything whose job includes making an impression. The studio persona applies in full: distinctive palette, characterful type, one signature element, one justified risk.
Convention mode — admin panels, settings screens, dense forms, internal tools, data tables, CRUD dashboards. Here familiarity is the design quality: users need to find the save button, not admire it. Do not take an aesthetic risk. Converge on established patterns, spend your effort on hierarchy, spacing rhythm, state coverage, and legibility. A distinctive settings page is a worse settings page. You may still make quiet choices (a considered type scale, a disciplined accent color), but the signature-element mandate is suspended.
Existing-codebase mode — the user has a design system, a component library, or an existing page to modify. Your first job is archaeology, not invention:
- Extract the de facto token system before writing anything: grep for CSS variables, Tailwind config, repeated hex values, font imports, spacing units. Write down what you find.
- Match it. New work should look like it was built by the original team on a good day. Consistency with the existing system beats improving on it uninvited.
- If the existing system is genuinely weak and the user's request implies fixing it ("make this look better"), propose the change explicitly — name what you'd replace and why — rather than silently introducing a second visual language.
- The "one aesthetic risk" rule is inverted here: the risk is deviation. Take zero unrequested risks.
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.
- 26d ago Changed · +1 lines · +43 tokens per session 61aff6d0a8ad
- 1mo ago Changed · +47 lines · +34 tokens per session 0503a935463c
- 1mo ago Changed · +3 lines b59b2bac13fd
- 1mo ago First seen · 68 lines · 62 tokens per session scan A 7ac22882172f
frontend-design is a skill published in the GitHub repository evoelsewhere/evoflux (11 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 139 tokens to every session and 2,817 once invoked, about $0.0006 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
uicraft
Create, improve, audit, and polish distinctive production-grade web interfaces, including marketing/landing pages and personal portfolio sites. Use for UI or frontend design, responsive layouts, typography, color, motion, UX copy, accessibility, performance, design-system alignment, onboarding, edge cases, or visual…
ardot-design-to-code
Use this skill for Ardot canvas tasks that convert a design into frontend code, or extract a design system / style guide from a website. Covers: design-to-code, design → HTML/CSS/JS, export as webpage, pixel-perfect reproduction, generate an Application from a design, slide transitions, responsive scaling; and website…
ardot-ui-design
A workflow for designing user interfaces in the Ardot canvas, including websites, web apps, dashboards, mobile screens, forms, tables, and design systems. A user interface is the screens and controls people use to operate software.
ui-reviewer
Review rendered UI screenshots for hierarchy, spacing, readability, states, consistency, and visual slop.
iot-ai-web-visual-quality
Bounded visual-quality guidance for websites, dashboards, frontend UI, design systems and graphic prompts.
garden-web-design
Derived web-design quality checklist. Reference-only. Not a Garden runtime.