MiMoCode is a terminal-based AI coding assistant that reads and writes code, runs commands, manages Git, and remembers project context across sessions. Developers use it to work with software projects through a command-line interface and connect it to language-model providers; the catalogue includes skills and instructions for it.
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 XiaomiMiMo/MiMo-Code --skill design-qagit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/XiaomiMiMo/MiMo-CodeWrote 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/xiaomimimo/mimo-code/design-qa)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/xiaomimimo/mimo-code/design-qa"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/xiaomimimo/mimo-code/design-qa/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/xiaomimimo/mimo-code/design-qa"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/xiaomimimo/mimo-code/design-qa.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 | $0.00068 | $0.02048 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00027 | $0.00819 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00410 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00205 |
Grade A, and why
design-qa 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 149 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Design QA
Use this internal helper to compare a prototype's source design against the rendered implementation before handoff.
Do not use this skill for broad UX critique, design critique, product audits, or flow reviews. Use audit for those user-facing requests.
Use this skill before every Product Design build handoff.
A passing QA run requires both:
- a source visual target: Figma node, image, screenshot, mockup, or source capture
- a rendered implementation: local URL, deployed URL, app screen, component, or screenshot
If either artifact cannot be opened, captured, or compared, write design-qa.md with final result: blocked and name the blocker. Do not let the build skill hand off as done.
Critical Overrides
Follow critical-overrides.
Workflow
Compare the intended design to the implementation as a product-quality reviewer, not as a generic aesthetic critic. The output must be a prioritized fix list grounded in evidence from both artifacts.
Do not write the QA review from memory, code, or file paths alone. Open or capture both the source design and the implementation first, then compare what is actually visible.
Do not pretend separate image views are side-by-side comparison. Put the source image and the implementation screenshot together in the same comparison input, then judge the visible differences from that combined input.
Design QA is an iteration loop. The first comparison may pass only when it finds no actionable P0/P1/P2 differences and no visual fixes are made in response.
When a comparison finds any P0/P1/P2 issue:
- Record the finding and keep the current result blocked.
- Apply the fix.
- Capture the revised implementation at the same viewport and state.
- Compare the revised capture against the source again.
A later pass must identify the earlier findings, the fixes made, and the post-fix visual evidence. Build, dependency, lint, deployment, and preview troubleshooting do not count as design-QA iterations.
What ships with it
2 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 149 lines · 68 tokens per session scan A a761ed96e1e9
design-qa is a skill published in the GitHub repository XiaomiMiMo/MiMo-Code (13,681 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 68 tokens to every session and 2,048 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
build-swiftui-interface
Use when a coding agent must design, scaffold, implement, or verify an iOS or macOS SwiftUI interface with Apple-platform state, accessibility, availability, testing, and Xcode evidence.
design-qa
Evaluate Cool Workflow architecture, product design, operator UX, context-pack, workflow-app, MCP/CLI, or release-process proposals. Use when Codex must decide whether a design respects FreeBSD/POLA, mechanism-not-policy, stable JSON surfaces, evidence, and verifier boundaries before implementation.
ux-review
Verify a shipped UI against objective design gates — WCAG accessibility, design-token fidelity, responsive/render integrity, interaction & state coverage, and visual regression — by rendering it in a real browser. Use for 'ux review', 'a11y check', 'does this UI hold up', or /ux-review. Enforces design quality; does…
verify
Exercise the real app/API/CLI and collect observable evidence; tests alone do not count as end-to-end verification.
dd-triage-flaky-test
Load when investigating a specific flaky test. Gets history, failure pattern, and category, then recommends fix, quarantine, or escalate.
atmos-validation
Validate Atmos projects, components, arbitrary JSON Schema inputs, EditorConfig, and GitHub Actions; use affected-file selection and native CI annotations.