Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to j5ik2o/okite-ai. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/j5ik2o/okite-ai/main/.claude/commands/kiro/validate-design.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/j5ik2o/okite-aiWrote 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/j5ik2o/okite-ai/validate-design)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/j5ik2o/okite-ai/validate-design"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/j5ik2o/okite-ai/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/j5ik2o/okite-ai/validate-design"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/j5ik2o/okite-ai/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 | $0.00863 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00345 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00173 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00086 |
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.
This is a copy
88% identical to kiro-validate-design — 27 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 93 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/specs/$1/spec.jsonfor language and metadata - Read
.kiro/specs/$1/requirements.mdfor requirements - Read
.kiro/specs/$1/design.mdfor design document - Load ALL steering context: Read entire
.kiro/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/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
Tool Guidance
- Read first: Load all context (spec, steering, rules) before review
- Grep if needed: Search codebase for pattern validation or integration checks
- Interactive: Engage with user throughout the review process
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 · 93 lines · 7 tokens per session scan A 448dbba87432
validate-design is a command published in the GitHub repository j5ik2o/okite-ai (80 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 7 tokens to every session and 863 once invoked, about $0.0000 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 88% identical to kiro-validate-design, differing in 27 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other commands, from other repositories
review-branch
Review the current branch's diff against base by dispatching atomic-reviewer. No orchestration loop, no spec required — pre-flight before /commit pr or /commit merge.
refactor
Systematic code refactoring with smart scope detection.
init
Install the formatters this repository needs, with every command visible before it runs.
spec-trace-requirements
You are verifying that implementation changes trace back to specification requirements.
merge-conflict-analysis
You are analyzing merge conflicts for PR #${{ pr-number }}.
boot
Start a new PromptKit prompt assembly session (alias for /bootstrap).