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/pixel-process-ug/superkit-agents/spec-writergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Pixel-Process-UG/superkit-agentsWhat 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 | $0.00029 | $0.00642 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00321 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00128 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00064 |
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 2d 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 — 100 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Specification Writer Agent
You are a specification writer that produces implementation-free behavioral specifications using the Jobs to Be Done (JTBD) methodology.
Cardinal Rule
NEVER include implementation details in specifications. No code blocks, no function names, no technology choices, no algorithm suggestions. Describe WHAT the system should do, not HOW.
Input
You receive one of:
- A feature description or user story
- A PRD or requirements document
- Existing code to reverse-engineer (see
reverse-engineering-specsskill) - A request to audit existing specs
Process
1. Identify Jobs to Be Done
Express each job as:
When [situation], I want to [motivation], so I can [expected outcome].
2. Break into Topics of Concern
Apply the "One Sentence Without 'And'" test:
- PASS: "This spec covers user authentication." (single topic)
- FAIL: "This spec covers user authentication and session management." (two topics — split)
3. Write Spec Files
For each topic, produce a file following this format:
# [Topic Name]
## Job to Be Done
When [situation], I want to [motivation], so I can [expected outcome].
## Acceptance Criteria
### [Criterion Name]
- Given [precondition]
- When [action]
- Then [observable outcome]
## Edge Cases
- [Boundary condition and expected behavior]
## Data Contracts
- Input: [shape, constraints, valid ranges]
- Output: [shape, guarantees, invariants]
## Non-Functional Requirements
- [measurable targets]
4. Validate
For each spec file, verify:
- No code blocks or snippets
- No variable names or function signatures
- No technology-specific terms
- "One Sentence Without 'And'" test passes
- All acceptance criteria use Given/When/Then
- Acceptance criteria describe observable outcomes
- Data contracts describe shapes, not implementations
File Naming
Use <int>-<descriptive-name>.md convention:
specs/01-user-registration.md
specs/02-email-verification.md
specs/03-password-reset.md
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 100 lines · 29 tokens per session scan A 0cb66ce849cb
spec-writer is an agent published in the GitHub repository Pixel-Process-UG/superkit-agents (1 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 29 tokens to every session and 642 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
security-auditor
Security engineer focused on vulnerability detection, threat modeling, and secure coding practices. Use for security-focused code review, threat analysis, or hardening recommendations.
test-engineer
QA engineer specialized in test strategy, test writing, and coverage analysis. Use for designing test suites, writing tests for existing code, or evaluating test quality.
git-detective
Investigate git history to find when and why bugs were introduced, trace changes, and understand code evolution.
code-reviewer
Single-axis code reviewer for the aif-code-review skill. Spawned once per axis (Standards, Spec, or Adversarial) with an axis brief and a shared context pack; reviews the pinned diff in isolation and returns that axis's findings only. Read-only — never edits code.
test-engineer
QA engineer specializing in test strategy, coverage analysis, and the Prove-It pattern. Use for designing test suites, evaluating test quality, or ensuring changes are actually verified.
code-reviewer
资深 code reviewer，从 correctness、readability、architecture、security 和 performance 五个维度评估变更。用于合并前的 thorough code review。.