cc-sdd is a spec-driven development workflow for coding agents: it turns approved software specifications into requirements, designs, task plans, and extended autonomous implementation. Developers use it across several AI coding agents, with independent review and task-level continuation for long-running work. The catalogue entries provide commands, skills, agents, and instructions for using this workflow.
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/gotalab/cc-sddWrote 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/gotalab/cc-sdd/kiro-validate-design)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/gotalab/cc-sdd/kiro-validate-design"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/gotalab/cc-sdd/kiro-validate-design/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/gotalab/cc-sdd/kiro-validate-design"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/gotalab/cc-sdd/kiro-validate-design.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 | $0.00000 | $0.00895 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00358 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00179 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00089 |
Grade A, and why
kiro-validate-design 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 2mo 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.
Copies of this mod
3 near-identical copies found in the catalogue:
- kiro-validate-design — 89% identical, 10 lines differ
- validate-design — 88% identical, 27 lines differ
- validate-design — 88% identical, 27 lines differ
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.
Technical Design Validation
<background_information>
- Mission: Conduct interactive quality review of technical design to ensure readiness for implementation
- Success Criteria:
- Critical issues identified (maximum 3 most important concerns)
- Balanced assessment with strengths recognized
- Clear GO/NO-GO decision with rationale
- Actionable feedback for improvements if needed </background_information>
Execution Steps
-
Load Context:
- Read
{{KIRO_DIR}}/specs/$1/spec.jsonfor language and metadata - Read
{{KIRO_DIR}}/specs/$1/requirements.mdfor requirements - Read
{{KIRO_DIR}}/specs/$1/design.mdfor design document - Load ALL steering context: Read entire
{{KIRO_DIR}}/steering/directory including:- Default files:
structure.md,tech.md,product.md - All custom steering files (regardless of mode settings)
- This provides complete project memory and context
- Default files:
- Read
-
Read Review Guidelines:
- Read
{{KIRO_DIR}}/settings/rules/design-review.mdfor review criteria and process
- Read
-
Execute Design Review:
- Follow design-review.md process: Analysis → Critical Issues → Strengths → GO/NO-GO
- Limit to 3 most important concerns
- Engage interactively with user
- Use language specified in spec.json for output
-
Provide Decision and Next Steps:
- Clear GO/NO-GO decision with rationale
- Guide user on proceeding based on decision
Important Constraints
- Quality assurance, not perfection seeking: Accept acceptable risk
- Critical focus only: Maximum 3 issues, only those significantly impacting success
- Interactive approach: Engage in dialogue, not one-way evaluation
- Balanced assessment: Recognize both strengths and weaknesses
- Actionable feedback: All suggestions must be implementable
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 94 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A f89e5a85a533
kiro-validate-design is a command published in the GitHub repository gotalab/cc-sdd (3,745 stars, last pushed 7d ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 895 tokens. 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
implementation-plan
Define an incremental plan for the active task as IMPLEMENTATIONPLAN.md plus a TASKSTATE.md update: smallest safe slices with scope, validation and exit criteria. No code is written. A --spec mode derives slices from a spec or PRD. A retrofit mode annotates in-progress plans so they can adopt implement-fleet. Do not…
slice-closure
Decide whether the current slice is ready to close, separating slice completion from task completion, and record the result in slice notes and TASKSTATE.md. Use when a slice was implemented, validated or reviewed and may be ready to close. Do not use before slice implementation, during planning, or for overall task…
decision-interview
Ask the minimum decision questions needed before turning the task into canonical implementation rules, on behavior, data integrity, rollout safety, or test strategy. Use when missing information is decision-driven (not factual) or undecided policy blocks planning; in an attended chain it records an open decision as…
godot-scene-plan
Plan the Godot scene and node structure for a 2D or 3D game feature before GDScript is written: scene tree, nodes, autoloads, signals, input map. A 3D plan SHALL declare its renderer tier. Do not use for game-idea framing (use problem-framing in its game-design mode), slicing a plan (use implementation-plan), blast…
release-plan
Design a pre-deploy release and rollout strategy: pick the pattern (feature flag, canary, blue-green, or progressive delivery) by risk, then specify the exposure ramp, promotion metric and threshold, and rollback trigger. Designs the rollout, never executes it. Gated --godot-mobile and --godot-desktop modes plan a…
repo-consistency-sweep
Defect-class detection for the lower-value half of code review: convention drift, type-safety gaps, security and multi-tenant invariants, operability issues. Runs after review-hard. Checks against a curated bug-class library that grows via pr-feedback-ingest. Use when at least one slice is implemented and you want a…