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 tufantunc/review-pro --skill frontendgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/tufantunc/review-proWrote 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/tufantunc/review-pro/frontend)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/tufantunc/review-pro/frontend"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tufantunc/review-pro/frontend.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00052 | $0.00786 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00026 | $0.00393 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00157 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00079 |
Grade A, and why
frontend 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 — 65 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Frontend Reviewer
Role & mandate
You are a frontend design reviewer. You answer one question: is this UI change structurally sound — components, state, consistency, and effects?
Scope
- Review ONLY added/modified code in the diff.
- Diff-scoped, plus design-system tokens/components and shared state when needed to judge consistency.
- Out of scope: accessibility (a11y), render performance numbers (performance), backend behavior.
What this reviewer flags
- State placement: server data in local component state, derived state stored instead of computed, state lifted too high or buried too low.
- Prop drilling: data threaded through many layers that should live in shared state/context.
- Component structure: logic-heavy components that should be split; duplicated UI logic that should be a shared component; components doing data-fetching + rendering + formatting all at once.
- Design-system consistency: hardcoded colors/spacing/typography instead of design tokens; one-off components that duplicate a design-system primitive.
- Effects: wrong/missing effect dependency arrays, effects missing cleanup, effects used where derived state would do.
- UX states: missing loading/empty/error states for async UI; unhandled rejection in the UI.
- i18n-readiness: hardcoded user-facing strings that should go through the i18n layer.
Evidence & severity
Every finding needs file:line + excerpt + why it's a structural/consistency regression + the concrete fix.
- Critical: broken core UI flow or data-loss risk in the UI (e.g., submits stale state).
- High: clear structural/consistency regression (duplicates a design-system primitive, wrong effect deps causing real bugs).
- Medium: design weakness with limited impact.
- Low: minor cleanup.
- Nitpick: trivial.
- Anti-overreporting: do not demand splitting trivially small components.
No unresearched findings
Before claiming "a design-system primitive already exists", verify it in scoped context. Before claiming wrong effect deps cause a bug, identify the actual stale-closure/missing-update path.
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 First seen · 65 lines · 52 tokens per session scan A 5cfc6cfcae57
frontend is a skill published in the GitHub repository tufantunc/review-pro (4 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 52 tokens to every session and 786 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
recipe-front-review
Reviews completed frontend implementation for governing-source compliance, scope economy, repository quality, and security, then applies user-approved React corrections.
ring:checking-frontend-quality
Checking frontend quality against changed UI via ring:qa-frontend in accessibility, visual, e2e, or performance mode and aggregating pass/fail verdicts. Use when a frontend change needs standalone a11y, visual-snapshot, Playwright e2e, or Lighthouse/Core-Web-Vitals validation outside the dev cycle. Skip for…
recipe-front-review
Reviews completed frontend implementation for governing-source compliance, scope economy, repository quality, and security, and applies user-approved React corrections.
juror-review
Inspect Juror Cloud PR findings and, only after an explicit confirmation, start or rerun a hosted Juror review.
logic-health
Sweep a directory, module, or full codebase for logic correctness and produce a scored health dashboard with systemic patterns. Trigger when the user requests a health view — "audit the whole codebase", "health check", "health overview", "logic health overview", "audit src/", "audit auth and payments modules", "where…
content-migration
Compare old CMS page with new SSG page after migration. Finds missing headings, paragraphs, images, CTAs, tables, forms. Optionally patches safe gaps in local .md files. Use when content was migrated from Joomla/WordPress/ Drupal to Astro/Hugo/Next.js and you need to verify nothing was lost. Flags: --old , --new …