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 stunt-double/stuntdouble-mcp --skill run-ux-validationgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/stunt-double/stuntdouble-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/stunt-double/stuntdouble-mcp/run-ux-validation)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/stunt-double/stuntdouble-mcp/run-ux-validation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/stunt-double/stuntdouble-mcp/run-ux-validation/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/stunt-double/stuntdouble-mcp/run-ux-validation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/stunt-double/stuntdouble-mcp/run-ux-validation.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 | $0.00023 | $0.00532 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00266 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00106 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00053 |
Grade A, and why
run-ux-validation 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 9d 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 — 65 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Run UX validation
When to use
- Before merging changes that affect user-facing flows
- After deploying to a staging environment
- When investigating reported UX friction
- As a pre-release quality gate
Instructions
-
Find the workspace and available validations:
list_workspaces()→ identify the target workspacelist_workflows(workspace_id)→ find journey-level workflow testslist_checklists(workspace_id)→ find point-in-time quality checks
-
Choose what to run:
- Workflows for end-to-end journeys (signup, checkout, onboarding)
- Checklists for quality gates (accessibility, performance, content)
- Run both if doing a full pre-release validation
-
Trigger runs:
run_workflow(workflow_id)→ returns a run ID (async)run_checklist(checklist_id)→ returns a run ID (async)- You can trigger multiple runs in parallel
-
Poll for results:
get_workflow_run(run_id)→ check status and step-level resultsget_checklist_run(run_id)→ check status and per-check results- Poll every few seconds until status shows complete
-
Report results:
- List each workflow/checklist with pass/fail status
- For failures, include the specific step that failed and what happened
- Note which actor (persona) encountered the issue
-
Follow up on failures:
list_feedback(project_id)→ check for related feedbackget_feedback(feedback_id)→ read full context on issuesupdate_feedback_status(feedback_id, status: "reviewed")→ mark triaged items- Suggest code changes or flag for the team
Example output
UX Validation Results — staging (2026-03-28)
Workflows:
[PASS] Signup → First Project (6/6 steps)
[FAIL] Checkout Flow (failed at step 4: payment form timeout)
[PASS] Team Invite (3/3 steps)
Checklists:
[PASS] Performance (5/5 checks)
[FAIL] Accessibility (6/8 checks — contrast ratio, focus order failed)
Summary: 2 failures found. Payment form timeout is a blocker.
Recommend fixing before release.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 65 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A 3382b1de25b0
run-ux-validation is a skill published in the GitHub repository stunt-double/stuntdouble-mcp (1 stars, last pushed 24d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 532 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
visual-testing
Visual testing, UI verification, and design comparison using screenshots and Figma integration. Use when the user wants to verify UI appearance, compare with Figma designs, test responsive layouts, check for visual regressions, or validate design implementation.
screen-reader-testing
Test web applications with screen readers including VoiceOver, NVDA, and JAWS. Use when validating screen reader compatibility, debugging accessibility issues, or ensuring assistive technology support.
qa-test-planner
Generate comprehensive test plans, manual test cases, regression test suites, and bug reports for QA engineers. Includes Figma MCP integration for design validation.
e2e-testing-patterns
Master end-to-end testing with Playwright and Cypress to build reliable test suites that catch bugs, improve confidence, and enable fast deployment. Use when implementing E2E tests, debugging flaky tests, or establishing testing standards.
designing-tests
Designs and implements testing strategies for any codebase. Use when adding tests, improving coverage, setting up testing infrastructure, debugging test failures, or when asked about unit tests, integration tests, or E2E testing.
qa/e2e-playwright
A method for writing Playwright end-to-end tests, which automate a browser to verify complete user journeys. It covers setup, reusable page objects, login reuse, API mocking, visual checks, multiple browsers and screen sizes, CI, and debugging.