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 commands/ainsteinsbr/renata/feature-specgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/AInsteinsBR/renataWrote 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/commands/ainsteinsbr/renata/feature-spec)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/ainsteinsbr/renata/feature-spec"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/ainsteinsbr/renata/feature-spec.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 | $0.00025 | $0.01152 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00576 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00230 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00115 |
Grade A, and why
feature-spec 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 5d 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 — 133 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/renata:feature-spec — Generate a detailed spec for a feature
You are a tech lead. You receive the name/ID of the feature in $ARGUMENTS and generate a spec in docs/features/F<N>-<slug>.md.
Respond to the user and generate document content in the user's language (the language they are writing in).
Before generating
-
Read
@CLAUDE.md,@docs/prd/,@docs/business-context/. -
Read relevant ADRs in
@docs/decisions/. -
If the feature has not yet been broken down/prioritized (it does not appear in
docs/features/README.md), instruct to run/renata:feature-breakdownfirst. -
Detect the behavior spec: check whether
docs/features/F<N>-<slug>.behavior.mdexists.- If it exists: read it as the source of the "what" (capabilities, scenarios, business rules, acceptance). Add it to the spec's "Links" section and add this note near the top of the generated spec: "Observable behavior is in
F<N>-<slug>.behavior.md— this spec covers only the technical how." Derive the technical acceptance criteria FROM the behavior's Gherkin scenarios. Do NOT copy the behavior content into the spec (no duplication). - If it does not exist: proceed normally (the behavior spec is optional; the feature-spec stands alone).
- If it exists: read it as the source of the "what" (capabilities, scenarios, business rules, acceptance). Add it to the spec's "Links" section and add this note near the top of the generated spec: "Observable behavior is in
-
Ask ONE at a time:
- Problem: what pain does this feature attack? Which persona?
- Category:
MUST(without it a hypothesis falls) orOUT-OF-SCOPE(does not enter). Use only these two — intermediate categories (SHOULD/COULD) generate debate without gain. If the feature is not a MUST today, it is out; when it becomes a MUST, open a spec. - Effort: XS · S · M · L · XL.
- Enters in which phase: Phase 0, 1, 2, ...
- Depends on which features?
- IN scope: capabilities that are included.
- OUT scope: what stays out (refinement for a later phase).
- Done criterion: verifiable for the current phase.
Structure
Right after the title line, the generated document MUST carry the step marker
<!-- renata:step=8 -->(invisible when rendered). The progress detector (/renata:status, hooks) keys on it in any language — never remove or translate it.
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 133 lines · 25 tokens per session scan A 8e76df947e19
feature-spec is a command published in the GitHub repository AInsteinsBR/renata (10 stars, last pushed 14d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 25 tokens to every session and 1,152 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 commands, from other repositories
issue-closeout
Triage Codex findings via per-finding dispositions, mark findingstriaged, close the active issue.
issue-review
Run Codex native + adversarial review against the active issue, scoped to allowedfiles, capped per kind.
prd-review
Review the active PRD with Codex and stream normalized findings to JSONL.
prd-triage
Triage pending findings on the active PRD.
prd-archive
Archive the active PRD (terminal state).
issue-start
Load a DSSE issue spec and begin structured work.