visual-review

visual-review is a skill for Claude Code from gosha70/code-copilot-team. It costs 60 tokens per session (1,105 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A review workflow for checking a finished user interface in a running web app. It captures screenshots at several screen sizes, checks accessibility, and compares the result with a design checklist.

In plain words
What is it for?
It helps review responsive web pages, run automated accessibility checks, record findings, and repeat fixes until the review passes.
Why use it?
It catches visual, layout, and accessibility problems that source-code review may miss before the interface is shipped.

Skill for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: shipped in a Claude Code plugin. Also seen: mentions Claude Code.

Part of the code-copilot-team plugin — 24 skills shipped together

Good fit It helps review responsive web pages, run automated accessibility checks, record findings, and repeat fixes until the review passes.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/gosha70/code-copilot-team/visual-review
Install

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.

Any agent
npx skills add gosha70/code-copilot-team --skill visual-review
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/gosha70/code-copilot-team

Made for: Claude Code.

Or install code-copilot-team, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 24 skills.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for visual-review

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gosha70/code-copilot-team/visual-review/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/gosha70/code-copilot-team/visual-review)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/gosha70/code-copilot-team/visual-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gosha70/code-copilot-team/visual-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.

agentmods 80×15 button for visual-review

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/gosha70/code-copilot-team/visual-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gosha70/code-copilot-team/visual-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 60 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,105 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe. Third-party audits
  • NVIDIA SkillSpector pass 7 Sept 2026
How audits are shown
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00060 $0.01105
Opus 5.5 $0.00024 $0.00442
Sonnet 5.5 $0.00012 $0.00221
Haiku 4.5 $0.00006 $0.00111

Measured 1mo ago against content hash 170a4943decf, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

visual-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 1mo 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.

adapters/claude-code/plugin/skills/visual-review/SKILL.md · 89 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 89 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Visual Review Loop Protocol

Invoke after UI is built against the design-system bundle. Generation alone can't be trusted — this loop verifies the rendered result against the committed DESIGN.md and fails the build until the bar is met.

The loop

build → boot dev server → rubric pre-filter (cheap, deterministic)
      → axe-core a11y gate (fail-fast)
      → Playwright screenshot @ 375 / 768 / 1440
      → CRITIC scores screenshots vs DESIGN.md rubric
      → triage [Blocker/High/Medium/Nitpick] → write critique-feedback.json
      → coding agent applies fixes → re-run → check exit criteria

Deterministic harness + pluggable critic. The harness/ runner does the identical-for-every-copilot parts (boot, screenshot, axe, rubric pre-filter, emit artifacts). The critic (aesthetic judgment) is either:

  • Agent critic (Claude Code): the visual-reviewer agent reads the PNGs directly (a picture is worth 1000 tokens) and scores them.
  • Runner critic (any other copilot): the runner calls a vision-LLM (provider, model, key from env) and writes critique-feedback.json.

Same rubric, same gates, same exit criteria — only the critic swaps.

Running it

From the project root: npm run copilot:review (wraps harness/). It:

  1. runs the a11y + rubric gates; on failure writes tmp/ui-review/critique-feedback.json and exits non-zero;
  2. captures screenshots at the three breakpoints;
  3. runs the critic;
  4. exits 0 only when all exit criteria pass (vision critic), or after emitting artifacts for the agent critic to judge.

The coding agent reads tmp/ui-review/critique-feedback.json ({passed, critiqueSummary, actionableFixes[]}), applies the fixes, and re-runs. Never hand-wave a failing gate — fix the UI.

The critic rubric (score each; source of truth is DESIGN.md)

Phased, adapted from published design-review agents (OneRedOak, Anthropic frontend-design, shiplightai):

  1. Typography — modular scale, real hierarchy, committed pairing (no default fonts).
  2. Spacing & layout — 4/8pt rhythm, internal ≤ external spacing, deliberate layout grammar (no lone centered column, no cardocalypse).
  3. Color & theme — semantic-token discipline, dominant + sharp accent (not evenly distributed), light/dark parity, no banned gradients.
  4. Hierarchy — one primary CTA per screen; attention guided by size/weight/space.
  5. States — empty/loading/error/success/focus present for every data component.
  6. Anti-slop flags — any Step-3 tell from design-system present ⇒ automatic fail.
  7. Domain fit — does it match the archetype/density locked in DESIGN.md.

Read the full file on GitHub · 89 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 1mo ago First seen · 89 lines · 60 tokens per session scan A 170a4943decf

Subscribe to this mod's changes

visual-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository gosha70/code-copilot-team (7 stars, last pushed 17d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 60 tokens to every session and 1,105 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-09-03.