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 HalidSaglam/saglitzdesign-mcp --skill design-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/HalidSaglam/saglitzdesign-mcpWrote 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/halidsaglam/saglitzdesign-mcp/design-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/halidsaglam/saglitzdesign-mcp/design-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/halidsaglam/saglitzdesign-mcp/design-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/halidsaglam/saglitzdesign-mcp/design-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/halidsaglam/saglitzdesign-mcp/design-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 | $0.00092 | $0.00901 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00046 | $0.00451 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00018 | $0.00180 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00090 |
Grade A, and why
design-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 — 43 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Design Review
Most AI design feedback guesses: it flags issues inconsistently, pads the list to look thorough, and critiques a text description instead of the actual pixels. Do the opposite — a fixed rubric applied to what you actually see.
Full rubric + checklists are in the SaglitzDesign MCP (
npx saglitzdesign-mcp): docsdesign-critique-scoring,accessibility,principles-heuristics,ai-default-aesthetic; toolsdesign_review_checklist, plus the deterministic auditors that turn opinions into numbers —design_lint,audit_design_system,audit_accessibility,audit_ux_copy,audit_generic_design— and the/saglitzdesign:critique_screenshotand/saglitzdesign:design_reviewworkflows.
Method
- Look first, judge second. Describe what you actually see — layout, hierarchy, the primary action, which states are shown. If you're unsure what an element is, say so; don't invent.
- Apply the fixed rubric. Score each of Nielsen's 10 heuristics 0–4 (total /40). Use the same rubric every time so scores are reproducible. Bands, as
design-critique-scoringpublishes them: 36–40 excellent (polish only, ship it), 28–35 good, 20–27 acceptable, 12–19 poor, 0–11 critical. - Cite specific elements. Every finding points to a concrete element: "the secondary 'Learn more' button competes with the primary CTA — two filled buttons," not "improve hierarchy."
- No padding. Report only real issues. If the screen is genuinely good, a short list is the correct answer.
- Rank by severity P0→P3, each with one concrete fix and the rule it comes from.
What to check (fast pass)
- Hierarchy: exactly one primary action per view? Does the important thing look most important? (squint test)
- Spacing: consistent scale? Grouping via space (within < between)? Aligned to one grid?
- Type: ≤2–3 sizes? Hierarchy via size/weight/color, not more fonts? Readable line length/height?
- Color & contrast: one accent used sparingly? Text ≥4.5:1, UI ≥3:1? Dark mode not naive inversion?
- Consistency: one radius system? Borders OR shadows? One icon family/weight?
- States: empty, loading, error, long-content, zero-results designed?
- Copy: verb-first buttons? Specific, human microcopy? No "Submit"/"Click here"?
- Accessibility: keyboard reachable, visible focus, tap targets ≥44pt, meaning not by color alone.
- Motion (if any): ease-out on enter, ease-in on exit, interruptible, respects reduced-motion.
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 Changed fd5c3449314e
- 12d ago First seen · 43 lines · 92 tokens per session scan A d5ea7f59cbe0
design-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository HalidSaglam/saglitzdesign-mcp (5 stars, last pushed 10d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 92 tokens to every session and 901 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
logo-creator
Create logos using AI image generation. Discuss style/ratio, generate variations, iterate with user feedback, crop, remove background, and export as SVG. Use when user wants to create a logo, icon, favicon, brand mark, mascot, emblem, or design a logo.
conversational-ux
Design voice and conversational interfaces — dialog flows, error recovery, and persona. Use when the interface speaks and listens rather than being tapped. For graphical input collection, use form-design.
design-negotiation
Advocate for design quality, scope, and timeline with partners and leadership using evidence and shared goals. Use in the conversation itself. For the commercial vocabulary behind it, use business-design (ux-strategy).
platform-conventions
Design to iOS and Android conventions — what each OS mandates, where they diverge, and when to unify. Use when shipping native apps. For breakpoint adaptation use responsive-design; for matching competitor patterns use jakobs-law (interaction-design).
design-debt-audit
Inventory and prioritise accumulated design inconsistencies across a product. Use when drift has built up over time. For token coverage specifically use design-token-audit (designer-toolkit); for WCAG gaps use accessibility-audit (design-systems).
design-impact-reporting
Communicate design's contribution to business and user outcomes in stakeholder language. Use when reporting results upward. For choosing the metrics in the first place, use metrics-definition (ux-strategy).