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/rhuss/cc-spexWrote 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/rhuss/cc-spex/speckit.spex.spec-refactoring)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/rhuss/cc-spex/speckit.spex.spec-refactoring"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/rhuss/cc-spex/speckit.spex.spec-refactoring/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/rhuss/cc-spex/speckit.spex.spec-refactoring"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/rhuss/cc-spex/speckit.spex.spec-refactoring.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 | $0.00011 | $0.02349 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00005 | $0.01175 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00470 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00235 |
Grade A, and why
speckit.spex.spec-refactoring 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 9d 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 447 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Specification Refactoring
Overview
Refactor specifications that have grown organically to improve clarity, consistency, and maintainability.
As specs evolve through speckit-spex-evolve, they can accumulate:
- Inconsistencies
- Redundancies
- Unclear sections
- Poor organization
This skill consolidates and improves specs while ensuring all implemented features remain covered.
When to Use
- Spec has evolved significantly through multiple updates
- Multiple related specs have redundancy
- Spec is difficult to understand or implement from
- Before major feature work on legacy spec
- Periodic maintenance (quarterly review)
Warning: Never refactor specs during active implementation. Wait until stable.
The Process
1. Analyze Current State
Read all related specs:
# Single spec
cat specs/features/[feature].md
# Multiple related specs
cat specs/features/user-*.md
Document current issues:
- Inconsistencies (conflicting requirements)
- Redundancies (duplicate requirements)
- Unclear sections (ambiguities)
- Poor structure (hard to navigate)
- Outdated sections (no longer relevant)
2. Review Implementation
Check what's actually implemented:
# Find implementation
rg "[feature-related-terms]" src/
# Check tests
rg "[feature-related-terms]" tests/
Critical: Refactored spec MUST cover all implemented features.
Create coverage map:
Implemented Feature 1 -> Spec Requirement X
Implemented Feature 2 -> Spec Requirement Y
...
If implementation exists without spec coverage, ADD it during refactor.
3. Identify Consolidation Opportunities
Look for:
Redundant requirements:
- Same requirement stated multiple times
- Similar requirements that could merge
- Duplicate error handling
Inconsistent terminology:
- Same concept called different names
- Inconsistent capitalization
- Different formats for similar things
Scattered related requirements:
- Auth requirements in multiple places
- Error handling spread throughout
- Related features not grouped
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 447 lines · 11 tokens per session scan A 59bdbf1f68af
speckit.spex.spec-refactoring is a command published in the GitHub repository rhuss/cc-spex (116 stars, last pushed 20d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 11 tokens to every session and 2,349 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 2026-08-30.
Other commands, from other repositories
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.
converge
Assess the current codebase against the feature's spec, plan, and tasks, then append any remaining unbuilt work as new tasks to tasks.md so implement can complete it.
implement
Execute the implementation plan by processing and executing all tasks defined in tasks.md.
analyze
Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.