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 human-avatar/skills-for-humanity --skill s4h-aesthetic-coherence-checkgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/human-avatar/skills-for-humanityWrote 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/human-avatar/skills-for-humanity/s4h-aesthetic-coherence-check)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/human-avatar/skills-for-humanity/s4h-aesthetic-coherence-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/human-avatar/skills-for-humanity/s4h-aesthetic-coherence-check/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/human-avatar/skills-for-humanity/s4h-aesthetic-coherence-check"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/human-avatar/skills-for-humanity/s4h-aesthetic-coherence-check.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00073 | $0.01351 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00036 | $0.00675 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00270 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00135 |
Grade A, and why
s4h-aesthetic-coherence-check 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 12d 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- aesthetic-coherence-check — 97% identical, 8 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 124 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Aesthetic Coherence Check
Incoherence is the default product of collaboration without a shared vision. Each part may be locally defensible — sensible in isolation, reasonable given what that contributor was optimising for — while the whole communicates nothing clearly. A perceptive reader or user feels this before they can name it. This skill makes the incoherence legible so it can be fixed.
Your Process
Step 1: State the Artefact and Its Intended Identity What is being examined — a product, document, strategy, brand, presentation, process? What identity or effect is it supposed to produce? "Should feel authoritative but approachable" or "Should communicate a single strategic bet" or "Should make a first-time user feel capable in under three minutes." The intended identity is the standard everything else will be measured against.
Framing check: Confirm the specific artefact and its intended identity before continuing. State what you've identified — the actual object being analyzed and the identity or effect it is supposed to produce — in one sentence, then use AskUserQuestion:
- Question: "I'm reading this as: [your one-sentence framing of the artefact and its intended identity]. Is that right?"
- Header: "Framing"
- Options:
- Yes — proceed — framing is correct
- Adjust — one element is off; user will correct it before you continue
- Reframe — different situation than read; incorporate the correction before proceeding
Step 2: Examine Each Part Break the artefact into its major components. For each: what does it communicate? What does it prioritise implicitly — speed vs depth, confidence vs humility, complexity vs accessibility? What does it assume about the audience or context? Extract these qualities as observations, not evaluations.
Step 3: Compare Parts to Each Other Where do assumptions conflict across parts? A section written for technical readers next to one written for executives. A formal tone in one component, casual in another. A design that prioritises simplicity in navigation but complexity in content. Name the specific conflict, not just that something feels inconsistent.
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 124 lines · 73 tokens per session scan A afc764bb5873
s4h-aesthetic-coherence-check is a skill published in the GitHub repository human-avatar/skills-for-humanity (223 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 73 tokens to every session and 1,351 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
customer-journey-map
Visualize every touchpoint a customer has with a product or service — stages, actions, emotions, pain points, opportunities.
double-diamond
Design problems with two diamond phases: Discover/Define (right problem), Develop/Deliver (right solution).
token-audit
Audit a design system's token definitions for naming violations, missing semantic tiers, and structural debt. This audits how tokens are defined and organised, NOT how they are consumed in code. Trigger when someone says: audit my tokens, token naming review, are my tokens consistent, token health check, review my…
codebase-index
Generate a pre-computed component index from a design system codebase — YAML infrastructure files containing a component inventory, relationship graph, and summary statistics that AI agents and MCP servers consume. This produces machine-readable index files in .ai/index/, NOT a health report or quality assessment.…
prototype
Use when asked to prototype one design question through a cheap logic or UI experiment, including button-driven state-model checks. Not for polished artifacts: use polished-web-prototype.
review-design
Review digital artifacts against the user’s task, creative direction, functional and accessibility requirements, and actual delivery medium. Inspect renders, native files, playback or interaction as appropriate; exercise relevant failure and recovery paths and report evidence-backed findings. Use for design review or…