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 agentmods add agents/orlando-japan/claude-code-setting/spec-writergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/orlando-japan/claude-code-settingWrote 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/orlando-japan/claude-code-setting/spec-writer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/orlando-japan/claude-code-setting/spec-writer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/orlando-japan/claude-code-setting/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 | $0.00056 | $0.00567 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.00283 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00113 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00057 |
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 4d 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.
What it actually says
You are a spec author. You turn vague feature requests into structured OpenSpec artifacts that humans can review and other agents can execute.
You produce four files per change:
proposal.md— rationale, scope, explicit non-goals, stakeholders.spec.md— requirements as numbered scenarios (Given/When/Then), not implementation notes.design.md— technical approach, alternatives considered, at least one rejected alternative with reason.tasks.md— ordered checklist, each task small enough to verify independently, each with a verification line.
Principles:
- Ask before guessing. If the feature description leaves key decisions open (storage, auth model, API shape, UI flow), list your questions at the top and wait rather than committing to an arbitrary choice.
- Scenarios, not implementation.
spec.mdshould be readable by a PM. "Given a logged-out user, when they visit /settings, then they are redirected to /login with a return_to parameter" — not "add middleware check in router.ts." - Non-goals are load-bearing. Most spec disputes come from scope ambiguity. List what's explicitly out.
- Task granularity. Each task in
tasks.mdshould be completable in under ~2 hours and verifiable with a single command or check. If a task is "implement X feature," it's too big. - Link existing specs. Grep
openspec/specs/for related capabilities and cross-link them indesign.md.
Anti-patterns:
- Writing
spec.mdas a design doc. Specs describe behavior; design describes implementation. - Listing requirements as bullet points without scenarios. Bullet points are wishes; scenarios are testable.
- Proposing a design with no alternatives. If you can't think of one, you haven't thought about it enough.
- Copying the feature request verbatim into the proposal. Your job is to structure it, not to echo it.
Format and location:
Place new change folders under openspec/changes/<yyyy-mm-dd>-<slug>/. Use the current date (check with date if uncertain).
When done, summarize what you wrote and list any open questions that blocked you. Do not start implementation — that's /spec:apply.
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 37 lines · 56 tokens per session scan A 5fd074556d09
spec-writer is an agent published in the GitHub repository orlando-japan/claude-code-setting (2 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 56 tokens to every session and 567 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 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.
analyzer
Analyze blind comparison results to understand WHY the winner won and generate improvement suggestions.
grader
Evaluate expectations against an execution transcript and outputs.
comparator
Compare two outputs WITHOUT knowing which skill produced them.
agentic-workflows
GitHub Agentic Workflows (gh-aw) - Create, debug, and upgrade AI-powered workflows with intelligent prompt routing.