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/niels-emmer/myaceWrote 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/niels-emmer/myace/sdd-clarify)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/niels-emmer/myace/sdd-clarify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/niels-emmer/myace/sdd-clarify/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/niels-emmer/myace/sdd-clarify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/niels-emmer/myace/sdd-clarify.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 | $0.00025 | $0.00372 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00186 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00074 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00037 |
Grade A, and why
sdd-clarify 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 5d 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.
What it actually says
- Read the target
docs/specs/<slug>/spec.md. - Check it against these categories for gaps, not just the markers already flagged: functional scope boundaries, data model and ownership, UX/error-state flows, non-functional constraints (performance, scale, availability), external integrations, edge cases, explicit exclusions, terminology consistency, and what "done" means. A spec can look complete and still be silently missing one of these.
- Rank every open question — flagged or newly found — by how much it would change the plan if answered differently. Keep only the top five; lower-impact ones get a reasonable default noted in the spec instead of a question.
- Ask one question at a time, each answerable in a short phrase or a multiple-choice pick, with your own recommended answer stated up front so the user is confirming or correcting, not starting from a blank page.
- After each answer, immediately write it into the relevant spec section (not a separate changelog) and remove the corresponding
[NEEDS CLARIFICATION]marker — don't batch edits until the end, since a session that gets cut short should still leave the spec more resolved than it started. - Stop once every top-five question is resolved or explicitly deferred with a stated default. Don't manufacture additional questions to seem thorough.
- Report the updated spec's remaining open items, if any, and state plainly whether it's ready for
sdd-plan.
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 14 lines · 25 tokens per session scan A 0ffcbd2fb52b
sdd-clarify is a command published in the GitHub repository niels-emmer/myace (1 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 25 tokens to every session and 372 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
address
Address the pressure-test review for a plan.
distill
Distill important session insights into doc/loom/knowledge.
checklist
Generate a custom checklist for the current feature based on user requirements.
clarify
Identify underspecified areas in the current feature spec by asking up to 5 highly targeted clarification questions and encoding answers back into the spec.
specify
Create or update the feature specification from a natural language feature description.
analyze
Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.