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.
npx agentmods add skills/andrewbartels1/solidworksmcp-python/openspec-proposenpx skills add andrewbartels1/SolidworksMCP-python --skill openspec-proposegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/andrewbartels1/SolidworksMCP-pythonWhat 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 | $0.00047 | $0.02431 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00023 | $0.01215 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00486 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00243 |
Grade A, and why
openspec-propose 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 3d 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.
This is a copy
81% identical to openspec-ff-change — 67 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 150 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Propose a new change - create the change and generate all artifacts in one step.
Planning boundary: This workflow creates planning artifacts only. The user request that selected or triggered this workflow authorizes planning only, even if it asks to build or fix something. Do not edit project code. After the planning artifacts are complete, stop. Do not start implementation in the same response, even if the initial request asks for it. Wait for a new user request after the artifacts are presented; then start the apply workflow.
I'll create a change with the artifacts your schema defines. With the default spec-driven schema that is:
- proposal.md (what & why)
specs/<capability-path>/spec.md(what the system must do - a delta, not the main spec)- design.md (how)
- tasks.md (implementation steps)
<capability-path> is the spec directory relative to specs/ (for example, user-auth or identity/user-auth). Preserve an existing capability's full path and follow the project's established organization for new capabilities.
When the user is ready to implement, they must start the apply workflow explicitly.
Store selection: If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run openspec store list --json to discover registered store ids, then pass --store <id> on the commands that read or write specs and changes (new change, status, instructions, list, show, validate, archive, doctor, context, view). Once selected, treat --store <id> as sticky for the rest of the workflow. Every unscoped example of those commands below is shorthand: before running it, append the flag. For example, run openspec status --change "<name>" --json --store "<id>", not the unscoped form shown below. Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local openspec/ root.
Input: The user's request should include a change name (kebab-case) OR a description of what they want to build.
Steps
-
Understand the request and clarify material ambiguity
If no clear input is provided, ask the user (open-ended, no preset options):
"What change do you want to work on? Describe what you want to build or fix."
From their description, derive a kebab-case name (e.g., "add user authentication" →
add-user-auth).IMPORTANT: Do NOT proceed without understanding what the user wants to build.
If the request contains ambiguity that would materially affect scope, externally observable behavior, compatibility, or acceptance criteria, ask the user before creating the change. For minor details, make a reasonable assumption and record it in the planning artifacts.
-
Determine the workflow schema
Use the configured default schema unless the user explicitly requests a different workflow.
Use a different schema only if the user:
- Explicitly requests a specific schema by name → use
--schema <schema-name> - Asks to "show workflows" or asks "what workflows" exist → resolve the authoritative root by running
openspec context --jsonfrom the current working directory. If the user explicitly selected a registered store, useopenspec context --json --store "<store-id>". Then runopenspec schemas --jsonwith its working directory set to the returnedroot.pathand let them choose. This preserves roots selected by a localstore:pointer or the globaldefaultStore;schemasdoes not accept--store. If context reports onlyno_openspec_root, runopenspec schemas --jsonfrom the current working directory instead. Do not use this fallback for invalid or unavailable stores.
Otherwise, omit
--schemato preserve the configured default. - Explicitly requests a specific schema by name → use
-
Create the change directory
Choose one schema form below. If a registered store is selected, append
--store "<store-id>"to that command and each later OpenSpec command shown below that accepts--store.
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 150 lines · 47 tokens per session scan A 74276e6ab341
openspec-propose is a skill published in the GitHub repository andrewbartels1/SolidworksMCP-python (65 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 47 tokens to every session and 2,431 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 81% identical to openspec-ff-change, differing in 67 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
brainstorming
You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.
auto-perf-optimize
Run agent-driven VS Code performance or memory investigations. Use when asked to launch Code OSS, automate a VS Code scenario, run the Chat memory smoke runner, capture renderer heap snapshots, take workflow screenshots, compare run summaries, or drive a repeatable scenario before heap-snapshot analysis.
chat-perf
Run chat perf benchmarks and memory leak checks against the local dev build or any published VS Code version. Use when investigating chat rendering regressions, validating perf-sensitive changes to chat UI, or checking for memory leaks in the chat response pipeline.
chat-pet-sprite-creation
Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.
cpu-profile-analysis
Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…