validate-design

An interactive review of a technical design document for a software feature. It checks the design against requirements, project architecture, technology choices, and other project guidance.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to review a feature design, check that it fits the existing system, identify up to three critical concerns, and discuss improvements interactively.
Why use it?
It catches important design problems before implementation and produces a clear proceed-or-stop decision with reasons.

Command for Claude Code

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add commands/kbwo/ccmanager/validate-design
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/kbwo/ccmanager

Made for: Claude Code.

Per session 7 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 1,323 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00007 $0.01323
Opus 5 $0.00003 $0.00661
Sonnet 5 $0.00001 $0.00265
Haiku 4.5 $0.00001 $0.00132

Measured 2d ago against content hash 2f144af5f4a3, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

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 2d 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.

.claude/commands/kiro/validate-design.md · 180 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 180 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Technical Design Validation

Interactive design quality review for feature: $1

Context Loading

Prerequisites Validation

  • Design document must exist: .kiro/specs/$1/design.md
  • If not exist, stop with message: "Run /kiro:spec-design $1 first to generate design document"

Review Context

  • Spec metadata: @.kiro/specs/$1/spec.json
  • Requirements document: @.kiro/specs/$1/requirements.md
  • Design document: @.kiro/specs/$1/design.md
  • Core steering documents:
    • Architecture: @.kiro/steering/structure.md
    • Technology: @.kiro/steering/tech.md
    • Product context: @.kiro/steering/product.md
  • Custom steering: All additional .md files in .kiro/steering/ directory

Task: Interactive Design Quality Review

Review Methodology

Focus: Critical issues only - limit to 3 most important concerns Format: Interactive dialogue with immediate feedback and improvement suggestions Outcome: GO/NO-GO decision with clear rationale

Core Review Criteria

1. Existing Architecture Alignment (Critical)

Evaluation Points:

  • Integration with existing system boundaries and layers
  • Consistency with established architectural patterns
  • Proper dependency direction and coupling management
  • Alignment with current module organization and responsibilities

Review Questions:

  • Does this design respect existing architectural boundaries?
  • Are new components properly integrated with existing systems?
  • Does the design follow established patterns and conventions?
2. Design Consistency & Standards

Evaluation Points:

  • Adherence to project naming conventions and code standards
  • Consistent error handling and logging strategies
  • Uniform approach to configuration and dependency management
  • Alignment with established data modeling patterns

Review Questions:

  • Is the design consistent with existing code standards?
  • Are error handling and configuration approaches unified?
  • Does naming and structure follow project conventions?
3. Extensibility & Maintainability

Evaluation Points:

  • Design flexibility for future requirements changes
  • Clear separation of concerns and single responsibility principle
  • Testability and debugging considerations
  • Documentation and code clarity requirements

Read the full file on GitHub · 180 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 2d ago First seen · 180 lines · 7 tokens per session scan A 2f144af5f4a3

Subscribe to this mod's changes

validate-design is a command published in the GitHub repository kbwo/ccmanager (1,229 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 7 tokens to every session and 1,323 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.