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-plan)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/niels-emmer/myace/sdd-plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/niels-emmer/myace/sdd-plan/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-plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/niels-emmer/myace/sdd-plan.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 | $0.00413 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00206 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00083 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00041 |
Grade A, and why
sdd-plan 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
docs/specs/<slug>/spec.md. If it still has unresolved[NEEDS CLARIFICATION]markers, stop and runsdd-clarifyfirst — planning against an ambiguous spec just moves the ambiguity into the code. - Resolve open technical unknowns explicitly before designing around them: which library, which existing service boundary, which of two viable data shapes. Where the codebase already has an established pattern for something similar, follow it rather than introducing a second way to do the same thing.
- If the
architecture-reviewskill is available (from the Software Engineer collection), use its design-note discipline for this step — a new data model, service boundary, or auth-relevant change is exactly the kind of decision that skill exists to force onto paper before code. - Write
docs/specs/<slug>/plan.mdcovering: the chosen approach and why alternatives were rejected, the data model (new/changed entities and their relationships), the interfaces being added or changed (API endpoints, function signatures, event shapes), and how this plan satisfies every functional requirement and edge case listed in the spec. - Cross-check against
docs/constitution.mdif it exists — a plan that violates a stated principle needs either a redesign or an explicit, justified exception noted in the plan, not a silent violation. - Do not write task lists or code here — that's
sdd-tasksandsdd-implement. This step produces the design that both build on. - Report the plan's location and flag anything you're genuinely uncertain about rather than presenting a guess as a settled decision.
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 a78580103b5e
sdd-plan 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 413 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.