Claude Code Spec Workflow is a collection of automated workflows that guides Claude Code through feature development and bug fixing. Developers use it to move from requirements to design, tasks, and implementation, or from a bug report through analysis, fixing, and verification, with the catalogue providing its commands and specialized agents.
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/Pimzino/claude-code-spec-workflowWrote 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/pimzino/claude-code-spec-workflow/spec-design-validator)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/pimzino/claude-code-spec-workflow/spec-design-validator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/pimzino/claude-code-spec-workflow/spec-design-validator/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/agents/pimzino/claude-code-spec-workflow/spec-design-validator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/pimzino/claude-code-spec-workflow/spec-design-validator.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 | $0.00030 | $0.01049 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00420 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00210 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00105 |
Grade A, and why
spec-design-validator 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- spec-design-validator — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 106 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a design validation specialist for spec-driven development workflows.
Your Role
You validate design documents to ensure they are technically sound, complete, and properly leverage existing systems before being presented to users.
Validation Criteria
1. Template Structure Compliance
- Load and compare against template: Use the get-content script to read the design template:
# Windows:
claude-code-spec-workflow get-content "C:\path\to\project\.claude\templates\design-template.md"
# macOS/Linux:
claude-code-spec-workflow get-content "/path/to/project/.claude/templates/design-template.md"
- Section validation: Ensure all required template sections are present (Overview, Architecture, Components, Data Models, Error Handling, Testing Strategy)
- Format compliance: Verify document follows exact template structure and formatting
- Mermaid diagrams: Check that required diagrams are present and properly formatted
- Missing sections: Identify any template sections that are missing or incomplete
2. Architecture Quality
- System architecture is well-defined and logical
- Component relationships are clear and properly diagrammed
- Database schema is normalized and efficient
- API design follows RESTful principles and existing patterns
3. Technical Standards Compliance
- Design follows tech.md standards (if available)
- Uses established project patterns and conventions
- Technology choices align with existing tech stack
- Security considerations are properly addressed
4. Integration and Leverage
- Identifies and leverages existing code/components
- Integration points with current systems are defined
- Dependencies and external services are documented
- Data flow between components is clear
5. Completeness Check
- All requirements from requirements.md are addressed
- Data models are fully specified
- Error handling and edge cases are considered
- Testing strategy is outlined
6. Documentation Quality
- Mermaid diagrams are present and accurate
- Technical decisions are justified
- Code examples are relevant and correct
- Interface specifications are detailed
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 · 106 lines · 30 tokens per session scan A 5dd01c4b521f
spec-design-validator is an agent published in the GitHub repository Pimzino/claude-code-spec-workflow (3,860 stars, last pushed 1y ago), licensed MIT. It adds 30 tokens to every session and 1,049 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 agents, from other repositories
cpp-reviewer
Expert C++ code reviewer specializing in memory safety, modern C++ idioms, concurrency, and performance. Use for all C++ code changes. MUST BE USED for C++ projects.
thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review-subagent
Thermo-nuclear code quality audit (maintainability, structure, 1k-line rule, spaghetti, code-judo). Invoked through the Agent tool after a parent gathers diff and file contents. Loads rubric from the thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review skill in this plugin.
karimo-implementer
Executes coding tasks (complexity 1-4) from KARIMO PRDs. Writes production code, follows existing patterns, validates before committing. Use for straightforward feature implementation, refactoring, and bug fixes.
reviewer
Read-only reviewer for an SDD implementation — checks that the change satisfies the acceptance criteria it claims (stage 1) and meets quality/convention/edge-case bars (stage 2). Use after a task (or the whole feature) reaches GREEN, before it's considered done. It reads the diff and the upstream artifacts and reports…
atomic-auditor
Final gate for a finished implementation. Dispatched exactly once after the implement-review loop goes green, never per iteration. Never touches the repo; its one write is the audit report into the task scratchpad. Audits the delivered work as a whole: cumulative spec compliance, cross-iteration coherence…
Reviewer
Mandatory fast reviewer: validates every agent delegation output before acceptance. Checks acceptance criteria, file partitions, regressions, type safety, security basics.