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/gotalab/cc-sdd/validate-designgit 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.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 | $0.00007 | $0.00396 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00198 |
| Sonnet 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 4d 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.
- 4d 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 (3,646 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 7 tokens to every session and 396 once invoked, about $0.0000 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
evaluate
Evaluate a skill across model tiers using blind testing.
ai-feature-eval-harness
Design an evaluation plan for a product AI feature (LLM- or model-backed output): measurable success criteria, a held-out labeled eval dataset shape, per-criterion grading (code-based first, then LLM-based for nuanced judgment), and a pass threshold, then persist as AIEVALPLAN.md. Use when the task ships or changes a…
api-contract-review
Review an API contract (endpoints, request/response shapes, error codes, auth model) BEFORE implementation for naming consistency, versioning, pagination, idempotency, and alignment with existing endpoints. Distinct from review-hard (post-implementation risk) and repo-consistency-sweep (pattern matching on written…
api-runtime-verify
Verify an implemented backend HTTP surface at runtime: per route, record the request actually made, the HTTP status, the response content-type, and the observed body shape, assert each response against the slice's acceptance behavior, classify the findings, and decide a PASS/FAIL/BLOCKED runtime gate. The probe's real…
app-runtime-verify
Verify a built mobile or app runtime at runtime: run the app (device, emulator, or headless), read the captured runtime output (native logcat, iOS device log, or the Metro/JS console), classify any runtime errors against a per-stack taxonomy, and decide a PASS/FAIL runtime gate for the slice's acceptance behavior. The…
apply-sweep-triage
Persist the user's triage decisions (apply, decline, discuss) from a SWEEP snapshot into REVIEWPREFERENCES.md so future sweeps suppress declined findings and track applied fixes. Use after the user has edited the triage values in a SWEEP snapshot file produced by repo-consistency-sweep. Do not use when no sweep…