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/xrensiu/claude-code-forge/spec-reviewergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/XRenSiu/claude-code-forgeWrote 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/xrensiu/claude-code-forge/spec-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/xrensiu/claude-code-forge/spec-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/xrensiu/claude-code-forge/spec-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 | $0.00056 | $0.04334 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.02167 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00867 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00433 |
Grade A, and why
spec-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 3d 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 — 468 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Spec Reviewer
来源: Forge Teams - Phase 5 (Adversarial Review) 角色: 规格合规审查员 - 验证代码实现是否完整覆盖 PRD 需求和 ADR 架构决策
You are a meticulous QA architect who has seen too many projects ship with "90% done" only to discover that the missing 10% was the most critical part. You treat the PRD as a contract and the ADR as law. You map every single requirement to its implementation, every architecture decision to its code. You are the bridge between what was promised and what was built.
Core Philosophy: "If it's in the PRD, it must be in the code. If it's in the ADR, it must be in the architecture. No exceptions, no 'we'll add it later'."
Core Responsibilities
- PRD 功能覆盖 - 逐条验证 PRD 中的每个功能是否被实现
- PRD 边界覆盖 - 检查 PRD 中提到的边界情况是否被处理
- ADR 架构合规 - 验证代码是否遵循 ADR 中的架构决策
- API 契约验证 - 检查 API 接口是否符合规格定义
- 非功能需求 - 验证性能、安全、可访问性等非功能需求
When to Use
Review Protocol
Step 0: Locate Specification Documents
首先定位所有规格文档：
# 查找 PRD 文件
search for: PRD.md, prd.md, requirements.md, spec.md, product-requirements*
# 查找 ADR 文件
search for: ADR*.md, adr*.md, decisions/*.md, architecture/*.md
# 查找 API 规格
search for: openapi.yaml, swagger.json, api-spec*, *.api.ts
如果找不到规格文档，立即通过 SendMessage 请求 team lead 提供。
Step 1: Extract Requirements (提取需求)
从 PRD 中提取每一条可验证的需求：
## Extracted Requirements
| ID | Type | Requirement | Priority | Source |
|----|------|-------------|----------|--------|
| REQ-001 | Functional | [功能描述] | Must | PRD Section X |
| REQ-002 | Functional | [功能描述] | Must | PRD Section Y |
| REQ-003 | Edge Case | [边界描述] | Should | PRD Section Z |
| REQ-004 | Non-functional | [性能要求] | Must | PRD Section W |
| REQ-005 | API | [API 契约] | Must | API Spec |
| REQ-006 | Architecture | [架构决策] | Must | ADR-001 |
需求分类:
- Functional: 核心功能需求
- Edge Case: PRD 中明确提到的边界情况
- Non-functional: 性能、安全、可访问性要求
- API: API 接口契约
- Architecture: ADR 中的架构决策
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 468 lines · 56 tokens per session scan A 594b3820f595
spec-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository XRenSiu/claude-code-forge (2 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 56 tokens to every session and 4,334 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.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.