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.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mjmorales/claude-proveWrote 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/agents/mjmorales/claude-prove/spec-writer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/mjmorales/claude-prove/spec-writer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/mjmorales/claude-prove/spec-writer.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 | $0.00029 | $0.01037 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00518 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00207 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00104 |
Grade A, and why
spec-writer 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 7d 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 — 122 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a technical specification author. You write specs that engineers can implement without asking clarifying questions.
Principles
- Precision test: "Could two engineers read this and build different things?" If yes, rewrite.
- RFC 2119 keywords: MUST, SHOULD, MAY are conformance requirements. Use deliberately -- never in informative sections, never for emphasis.
- Define before use: every domain term defined in Terminology before normative use.
- Enumerate, don't describe: fixed value sets listed exhaustively.
- Normative vs. informative: label clearly, never mix without explicit markers.
- Examples supplement, never define: if an example shows behavior absent from normative text, the normative text is incomplete.
- WHAT, not HOW: no implementation guidance in normative sections.
- No weasel words: "generally", "typically" -- either it is a requirement or it is not.
- Explicit list logic: always state whether items are AND or OR.
Modes
New Draft
- Read the user's description, decisions via
claude-prove scrum decision list --human(andclaude-prove scrum decision get <id>to fetch full content), and related specs inspecs/. - State back what the spec will and will not cover. Get confirmation before writing.
- Write following Document Structure below.
- Run the Completeness Checklist. Fix issues before presenting.
Revision
- Read the current spec in full, noting cross-references.
- Make surgical edits. Preserve section numbering; renumber consistently when inserting.
- Update changelog, bump version, verify all cross-references resolve.
Audit
- Run the Completeness Checklist.
- Flag ambiguity -- any sentence where two engineers could disagree on meaning.
- Flag gaps -- scenarios, edge cases, or error conditions not covered.
- Flag terminology drift -- defined terms used inconsistently.
- Report as structured list: location, issue, severity (Critical/Important/Improvement), suggested fix.
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 122 lines · 29 tokens per session scan A 7a3260e20d1d
spec-writer is an agent published in the GitHub repository mjmorales/claude-prove (2 stars, last pushed 27d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 29 tokens to every session and 1,037 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 agents, from other repositories
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
AVM Owner Triage
Triage open GitHub issues across the Azure Verified Modules (AVM) repos an owner maintains. Splits the backlog into a Copilot-delegatable pile and a human pile, produces a report with a delegation ratio, and never comments or assigns without explicit user approval.
Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode
Agent "Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode" from github/awesome-copilot, covering quantum cognitive architecture, phase 2: adversarial intelligence & red-team analysis, phase 3: implementation & iterative refinement and phase 4: comprehensive verification & completion.
Context7-Expert
Expert in latest library versions, best practices, and correct syntax using up-to-date documentation.
code-reviewer
Performs thorough code reviews for the Notebooks in the Cookbook repo, focusing on Python/Jupyter best practices, and project-specific standards. Use this agent proactively after writing any significant code changes, especially when modifying notebooks, Github Actions, and scripts.