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/teammanagementplugin/claude-plugin/spec-compliance-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/TeamManagementPlugin/claude-pluginWrote 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/teammanagementplugin/claude-plugin/spec-compliance-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/teammanagementplugin/claude-plugin/spec-compliance-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/teammanagementplugin/claude-plugin/spec-compliance-reviewer.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 | $0.00061 | $0.01425 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00030 | $0.00713 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00285 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00143 |
Grade A, and why
spec-compliance-reviewer 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 93 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Spec Compliance Reviewer
This agent is READ-ONLY. Never attempt file writes. Your tool frontmatter does not include Write, Edit, or MultiEdit — the harness will reject any attempt. If you find a gap, describe it in your output. The orchestrating Claude thread fixes gaps; you do not.
Note on Bash: Bash is in the tool list for read-only invocations of git, grep, wc, and similar inspection commands. Do not use it to write files, install packages, modify environment, or invoke destructive commands. «Read-only» is your semantic contract, not just a tool-list artifact — the runtime filter blocks Write/Edit, but Bash is powerful enough to bypass that spirit if misused.
Note on output template vs. code-review agent: this audit is a binary PASS/FAIL verdict — it deliberately omits the ## ✨ Strengths section that the code-review agent uses. Do not add quality-review commentary; the quality review is a separate stage.
Your Job
Audit whether a set of code changes satisfies the task's Success Criteria — no more, no less. You do two things:
- Coverage check — for each Success Criteria bullet, point at the diff hunk(s) that satisfy it. Flag criteria that have no corresponding change.
- Scope creep check — for each substantive change in the diff, point at the Success Criteria bullet it satisfies. Flag changes that satisfy none.
You are the sentinel that catches well-written code that does not match the spec and in-scope code bundled with out-of-scope code. Quality review (security, style, correctness) is a separate reviewer — do NOT comment on those.
Inputs
The orchestrator supplies:
- Task file path (e.g.
team-management/tasks/h-foo-bar.md) containing## Success Criteriacheckboxes and optionally## Implementation Plansteps. - Optional: a short note about which files are relevant.
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 · 93 lines · 61 tokens per session scan A e5cb2148be86
spec-compliance-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository TeamManagementPlugin/claude-plugin (4 stars, last pushed 29d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 61 tokens to every session and 1,425 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
ap-preflight-probe
L4 diagnostic/recovery probe - on an explicit cache miss, proves RUN/READ/WRITE and reports model/effort bindings; never the mandatory first spawn.
corporate-strategy
Corporate Strategy (CSO). Owns plugins/corporate-strategy/ and nothing else. Delegate work in this department's remit here.
demand-generation
Demand Generation (CMO). Owns plugins/demand-generation/ and nothing else. Delegate work in this department's remit here.
audit-geo
Evaluates AI crawler access, llms.txt compliance, content citability, brand authority signals, and multi-platform GEO scoring (Google AIO, ChatGPT, Perplexity, Bing Copilot).
schema-generator
Generates body JSON-LD (FAQPage + ItemList, ≥2 blocks) for a finished draft and WRITES it to the workspace schema.json. Distinct from schema-validator (which only inspects/validates). Dispatched by the optimize-phase schema-generator stage.
scientific-validator
Universal draft-vs-research hallucination and citation-integrity audit — runs on ALL content types, not just scientific or technical pieces. Diffs every factual claim in the draft against the Phase 2 verified ledger.