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/validate-design)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/gotalab/cc-sdd/validate-design"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/gotalab/cc-sdd/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/validate-design"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/gotalab/cc-sdd/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 | $0.00007 | $0.00396 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00158 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00079 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00040 |
Grade A, and why
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 1mo 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
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- validate-design — 86% identical, 16 lines differ
What it actually says
Technical Design Validation
Parse Arguments
- Feature name:
$1
Validate
Check that design has been completed:
- Verify
{{KIRO_DIR}}/specs/$1/exists - Verify
{{KIRO_DIR}}/specs/$1/design.mdexists
If validation fails, inform user to complete design phase first.
Invoke Subagent
Delegate design validation to validate-design-agent:
Use the Task tool to invoke the Subagent with file path patterns:
Task(
subagent_type="validate-design-agent",
description="Interactive design review",
prompt="""
Feature: $1
Spec directory: {{KIRO_DIR}}/specs/$1/
File patterns to read:
- {{KIRO_DIR}}/specs/$1/spec.json
- {{KIRO_DIR}}/specs/$1/requirements.md
- {{KIRO_DIR}}/specs/$1/design.md
- {{KIRO_DIR}}/steering/*.md
- {{KIRO_DIR}}/settings/rules/design-review.md
"""
)
Display Result
Show Subagent summary to user, then provide next step guidance:
Next Phase: Task Generation
If Design Passes Validation (GO Decision):
- Review feedback and apply changes if needed
- Run
/kiro:spec-tasks $1to generate implementation tasks - Or
/kiro:spec-tasks $1 -yto auto-approve and proceed directly
If Design Needs Revision (NO-GO Decision):
- Address critical issues identified
- Re-run
/kiro:spec-design $1with improvements - Re-validate with
/kiro:validate-design $1
Note: Design validation is recommended but optional. Quality review helps catch issues early.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 59 lines · 7 tokens per session scan A eef3c2dd4e25
validate-design is a command published in the GitHub repository gotalab/cc-sdd (3,739 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 7 tokens to every session and 396 once invoked, about $0.0000 per session on Opus 5.5. 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
pr-feedback-ingest
Turn PR feedback (Greptile, CI, bots, humans) into a traceable backlog, so the next step is a narrow implement-approved-slice. Corrective scope only. Use when a PR has review feedback to map to files and slices. Do not use for a new direction or contract (use post-review-pivot), no payload, or task-memory drift only…
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…
review-hard
Review the current task changes for correctness, safety, and maintainability risks before slice closure or PR prep, and recommend the smallest safe next step. Use when a slice or task-level implementation was completed, the user wants a focused engineering risk review before closure or PR prep, or meaningful issues…
pr-package
Prepare a GitHub PR delivery package (branch, commits, PR title and body, reviewer notes) from the real git diff against an explicit base branch, persisted as PRPACKAGE.md, never inventing work outside the diff. Use when scope is done and diff is stable. Do not use mid-implementation, for a branch name (use…
security-review
Security review of task changes: threat modeling, OWASP ASVS L1 checklist, auth/authz flow tracing, dependency/secret scan reminders. Distinct from review-hard (general risk) and repo-consistency-sweep (pattern matching). Use when the task touches authentication, authorization, public endpoints, PII, crypto, or…
verify-against-rubric-fleet
Orchestrator-workers generalization of verify-against-rubric: parallel stateless sub-agents judge one artifact each against ONE locked rubric, merged into VERIFICATIONLOG.md. Use when N >= 4 artifacts share one rubric (multi-slice retrospective, batch PR review). Do not use for single artifacts (use…