Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to xsovad06/sova. 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/xsovad06/sova/main/.claude/commands/spec.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/xsovad06/sovaWrote 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/xsovad06/sova/spec)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/xsovad06/sova/spec"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/xsovad06/sova/spec/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/xsovad06/sova/spec"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/xsovad06/sova/spec.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 | $0.00014 | $0.02248 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00899 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00450 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00225 |
Grade A, and why
spec 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 14d 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 — 279 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Specification
Produce a structured specification document for a task before development starts. Shifts architectural and UX decisions to the cheap planning phase instead of the expensive coding phase.
Task: $ARGUMENTS
Instructions
Step 1: Fetch the Task
If $ARGUMENTS is a text description (not a number or ticket key), use it directly as the problem statement and skip to Step 2.
Determine the task source by running sova config and reading the task_source row (configuration lives in .claude/sova.db, not in a file).
GitHub (the default):
gh issue view $ARGUMENTS --json number,title,body,labels,milestone
JIRA (task_source.type = "jira"):
jira issue view $ARGUMENTS --plain
Extract: title, description, status, linked/blocked tickets, components.
Save the original description verbatim: it will be preserved in the spec.
Early exit (already implemented): if the issue body contains a Research section that concludes the issue is already fully implemented (look for phrases like "already implemented", "already complete", "no remaining work"), write a minimal spec file to .claude/specs/{issue-number}-already-implemented.md with the following content, then stop. Do not explore the codebase or write a full spec:
# Spec: {Issue title}
**Issue**: #{number}
**Status**: approved
**Created**: {YYYY-MM-DD}
**Complexity**: trivial
## Problem
Already implemented per research findings.
## Solution
No changes needed. The research step confirmed this issue is already fully implemented.
Step 2: Read Project Context
Read whatever exists; skip files that are missing:
CLAUDE.mdandAGENTS.mdfor project conventions.claude/rules/architecture.mdfor component overview and design decisions- The cookbook for known patterns and past mistakes: the
README.mdindex of.claude/agent-memory/cookbook/plus the domain files relevant to this task when that directory exists, otherwise.claude/agent-memory/cookbook.md; also.claude/agent-memory/common-mistakes.mdif present
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.
- 14d ago Changed · +11 lines d2bb8b0e19f6
- 16d ago Changed · +3 lines e89464945c75
- 21d ago Changed af9976f63fa7
- 1mo ago Changed 22333e46acf2
- 1mo ago Changed · -10 lines aee08a4cd3ee
- 2mo ago First seen · 275 lines · 14 tokens per session scan A dc6528bf8486
spec is a command published in the GitHub repository xsovad06/sova (2 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 14 tokens to every session and 2,248 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. 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 2026-08-31.
Other commands, from other repositories
audit
Audit the premises of a document — refute-first, one claim per agent, refutations returned as checkable anchors.
ground
Verify the Evidence Anchors in a document (defaults to the newest plan file).
greptile-review
Execute the full Greptile review cycle on a PR, looping until score meets threshold or circuit breaker triggers.
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.
advanced-code-review-context
Advanced Code Review Phase 2: Context Analysis - load previous reviews, PR history, declined items.
code-review-give
Give mode for code-review: Review someone else's code with multi-pass analysis and structured recommendations.