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/formin/spec-kit-harnessWrote 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/formin/spec-kit-harness/speckit.harness.status)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/formin/spec-kit-harness/speckit.harness.status"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/formin/spec-kit-harness/speckit.harness.status/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/commands/formin/spec-kit-harness/speckit.harness.status"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/formin/spec-kit-harness/speckit.harness.status.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 | $0.00016 | $0.00834 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00417 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00167 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00083 |
Grade A, and why
speckit.harness.status 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 8d 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 — 94 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Harness Status — Budget-Aware Context Rendering
Render the externalized harness state as a compact working slice. This is the Harness-1 (arXiv:2606.02373) "budget-aware context rendering" step exposed as a command: instead of re-reading transcripts or whole files, the agent (and the user) get a bounded snapshot that is sufficient to decide the next action.
Run it at any time — especially at the start of a fresh session to resume research with zero context carried over, or before deciding whether more exploration is worth the budget.
This command is read-only: it writes nothing and consumes no budget.
User Input
$ARGUMENTS
Optional. full renders larger slices (3× the configured sizes); a topic
string filters curated/candidate rows to those matching it.
Steps
1. Locate state
Resolve HARNESS_DIR as in /speckit.harness.init. If no harness exists,
say so and point to /speckit.harness.init — do not create anything.
2. Load slices only
Read configuration for slice sizes (rendering.*), then load:
budget.md— mission(s), budget table, stop conditions, last 5 action-log rows.curated.md— topcurated_sliceentries by importance (critical first); count the rest.candidates.md— up tocandidates_slicerows with statusnew/inspected; count the rest.verification.md— allrefutedrows, plus counts by verdict; listcriticalcurated entries lacking averifiedrecord.observations.md— lastobservations_sliceentries.
Do not read evidence.md bodies, spec/plan files, or anything beyond the
slices. Keep the rendered output within the configured context_tokens cap;
truncate lowest-importance material first and say what was truncated.
3. Render the snapshot
# Harness Status — <feature> (<date>)
**Mission**: <mission lines>
**Budget**: searches <r>/<b> · inspections <r>/<b> · verifications <r>/<b> remaining
**Curated set** (<shown>/<total>, cap <cap>):
| ID | Importance | Finding | Verified? |
...
**Open frontier** (<shown>/<total> candidates): ...
**Verification**: <n> verified · <n> refuted · <n> unverifiable
⚠ Unverified critical claims: <list or "none">
⚠ Refuted (do not rely on): <list or "none">
**Recent activity**: <observation slice, one line each>
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 94 lines · 16 tokens per session scan A ad1e83a4b389
speckit.harness.status is a command published in the GitHub repository formin/spec-kit-harness (5 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 16 tokens to every session and 834 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
archive
Archive a feature specification into main project memory after merge, resolving gaps and conflicts.
sddp-implement-qc-loop
Command description: Run implement and QC in a continuous loop. Argument hint: [optional: feature directory or branch name] Command category: orchestration Prerequisites: spec, plan, tasks.
sddp-checklist
Command description: Generate and evaluate a requirements quality checklist. Argument hint: [optional: quality focus or feature context] Command category: feature-delivery Prerequisites: spec, plan.
sddp-plan
Command description: Create an implementation plan from the current feature specification. Argument hint: [optional: planning constraints or focus areas] Command category: feature-delivery Prerequisites: spec.
sddp-prd
Command description: Create or refine the canonical product document. Argument hint: [rough product idea, users, domain, or market opportunity] Command category: project-bootstrap Prerequisites: none.
sddp-qc
Command description: Run quality control against the implemented feature. Argument hint: [optional: testing focus such as unit tests, security audit, requirements sync] Command category: feature-delivery Prerequisites: spec, plan, tasks, implementation:complete.