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/griddynamics/rosetta/requirements-authoring-flowgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/griddynamics/rosettaWrote 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/griddynamics/rosetta/requirements-authoring-flow)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/griddynamics/rosetta/requirements-authoring-flow"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/griddynamics/rosetta/requirements-authoring-flow.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 | $0.00021 | $0.01922 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00961 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00384 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00192 |
Grade A, and why
requirements-authoring-flow 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 today.
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 — 175 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
<description_and_purpose>
Prevents premature drafting by enforcing HITL gates where every <req> unit receives explicit user approval before proceeding. Each phase produces traceable artifacts (Final Requirements Set, Validation Pack, Traceability Matrix). Input: user request for new requirements, edits, review, refactor, or validation; USE SKILL requirements-authoring and PROACTIVELY REQUIRE its use in all phases and subagents.
</description_and_purpose>
<workflow_phases>
<prerequisites phase="0", applies="ALL">
- All Rosetta prep steps MUST be FULLY completed
- USE SKILL
load-project-context,hitl - MUST ALWAYS use todo tasks ledger, ASAP. Phases are sequential. Independent tasks can run in parallel.
- No rush, take your time, MUST FOLLOW WORKFLOW ENTIRELY, no skipping
- Every phase MUST update
requirements-authoring-flow-state.mdin FEATURE TEMP with: phase name, status, artifact produced, and open questions. - Orchestrator and subagents MUST USE SKILL
requirements-authoring. - If task is to reverse engineer orchestrator MUST USE SKILL
reverse-engineering. - Keep requirement identifiers in code comments only, must not be user facing.
- If
/goalis set repeat phases 5-6 until goal is met, then continue with the rest of phases. - This workflow MUST be used with Fable, Opus, GPT-5.5+ class models => IF NOT - DEMAND USER TO SWITCH MODEL
IMPORTANT! If the task is to reverse engineer requirements, spawn MULTIPLE subagents with each handling one unit of analysis (one screen, one page, one controller, one endpoint, etc) to effectively prevent hallucinations by narrow scoping for phases intent_capture, outline, draft, validate.
Artifact: Discovery Summary (context, existing requirements, constraints, affected files). Done when: scope boundaries and relevant requirement files are identified.
- Complete all Rosetta prep steps
- Detect environment and project structure
- Read existing requirements, glossary, assumptions, constraints
- Identify requirement areas (FR, NFR, interfaces, data, traceability)
- Record assumptions and unknowns
- Required skills:
requirements-authoring - Recommended skills:
reverse-engineering
Artifact: Research Notes (sources, constraints, prior art, reusable requirement patterns). Done when: relevant references are gathered OR no additional sources are needed. Skip when: local context is complete and no external standards are needed.
- Gather supporting docs and prior decisions
- Collect requirement patterns and quality criteria
- Capture measurable thresholds and terminology constraints
- Required skills:
requirements-authoring
<intent_capture phase="3" priority="must" subagent="requirements-engineer" role="Requirements analyst capturing intent and assumptions" subagent_required_model="Claude Opus 5, GPT-5.6 Sol, Gemini 3.7 Flash">
Artifact: Intent Capture. Done when: intent is restated, scope and goals confirmed, assumptions listed, and questions resolved.
- Restate intent and confirm scope and goals
- List assumptions and targeted questions
- HITL: present intent capture and get explicit approval
- Resolve blockers before outlining or drafting
- Required skills:
requirements-authoring
</intent_capture>
Artifact: Requirement Outline (areas, file mapping, ID strategy, traceability plan). Done when: user approves structure and requirement batching strategy.
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.
- today First seen · 175 lines · 21 tokens per session scan A eb6365f32615
requirements-authoring-flow is a command published in the GitHub repository griddynamics/rosetta (342 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 21 tokens to every session and 1,922 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 2026-09-03.
Other commands, from other repositories
OPSX: Apply
Implement tasks from an OpenSpec change (Experimental).
OPSX: Propose
Propose a new change - create it and generate all artifacts in one step.
OPSX: Archive
Archive a completed change in the experimental workflow.
OPSX: Explore
Enter explore mode - think through ideas, investigate problems, clarify requirements.
/opsx-propose
Propose a new change - create it and generate all artifacts in one step.
/opsx-sync
Sync delta specs from a change to main specs.