specification-compliance-review

specification-compliance-review is a skill for Claude Code, Codex from AtlasOmnia/hermes-custom-pack. It costs 35 tokens per session (13,324 once invoked), scanned B, a copy of specification-compliance-review, MIT.

A review method for checking whether an implementation satisfies every requirement in an explicit specification. It also checks whether meaningful tests or other evidence prove those requirements.

In plain words
What is it for?
It is for auditing partially finished, claimed-complete, or passing implementations against a specification and recording evidence for each requirement.
Why use it?
A passing build or test suite may not cover important behavior such as cancellation, concurrency, backpressure, or integration details.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Written for no agent in particular: nothing here depends on one. Also seen: mentions AGENTS.md.

Good fit It is for auditing partially finished, claimed-complete, or passing implementations against a specification and recording evidence for each requirement.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/atlasomnia/hermes-custom-pack/specification-compliance-review
Install

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.

Any agent
npx skills add AtlasOmnia/hermes-custom-pack --skill specification-compliance-review
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/AtlasOmnia/hermes-custom-pack

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for specification-compliance-review

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/atlasomnia/hermes-custom-pack/specification-compliance-review/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/atlasomnia/hermes-custom-pack/specification-compliance-review)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/atlasomnia/hermes-custom-pack/specification-compliance-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/atlasomnia/hermes-custom-pack/specification-compliance-review/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for specification-compliance-review

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/atlasomnia/hermes-custom-pack/specification-compliance-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/atlasomnia/hermes-custom-pack/specification-compliance-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 35 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 13,324 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan B 1 finding. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin 100% copy Near-identical to another mod in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00035 $0.13324
Opus 5 $0.00017 $0.06662
Sonnet 5 $0.00007 $0.02665
Haiku 4.5 $0.00003 $0.01332

Measured 7d ago against content hash b94ed575df2b, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-11, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade B, and why

specification-compliance-review scanned grade B with 1 finding 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 7d 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.

Asks for rootmediumPrivilege escalation

A mod that escalates privileges can change anything on the machine, not only the project.

A focused iOS verification should use an actually available simulator destination and then run the complete test target. Record the exact destination and distinguish “unverified due to unavailable destination” from a sou
Origin

This is a copy

100% identical to specification-compliance-review — 0 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.

skills/specification-compliance-review/SKILL.md · 512 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 512 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Specification-Compliance Review

Overview

Use this skill when an implementation is described as partial, passing, or complete and the task is to determine whether it actually satisfies an explicit specification. This is not a generic code review and not a re-run of the test suite. The central question is: does every normative requirement have both a correct implementation path and a meaningful proof?

A green build proves syntax, compilation, and perhaps the tested examples. It does not prove race behavior, cancellation semantics, exact backpressure policy, integration parity, or compliance with explicit non-goals.

Workflow

1. Establish the review baseline

Read, in order:

  1. The task specification and surrounding plan/release gates.
  2. Repository guidance (AGENTS.md, README, project instructions).
  3. The changed files and their callers.
  4. The tests added or claimed as evidence.
  5. Git status/diff and recent relevant history.

Create a requirement matrix with one row per normative clause:

Requirement Production evidence Proving test Execution result Status
Exact behavior path:lines test name + fixture command/output pass/fail/unknown

Keep unknown distinct from fail. A test that could not run is not a passing test.

1B. Preflight implementation plans for load-bearing assumptions

When the artifact under review is an implementation plan rather than completed code, identify every external behavior that several downstream tasks assume: server-owned tool execution, plugin loading, request-context propagation, restart/reload ownership, stable host identity, or update/rollback semantics.

Do not let later RED tests encode an unproven API contract. Insert the smallest real-runtime spike before dependent work, capture the exact request/event/context contract, and gate downstream tasks on it. If the plan routes opaque identifiers through model-visible prompt text, require a deterministic metadata/session channel or explicitly stop for the missing platform capability; model copying is not a trusted transport.

Read the full file on GitHub · 512 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 7d ago First seen · 512 lines · 35 tokens per session scan B b94ed575df2b

Subscribe to this mod's changes

specification-compliance-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository AtlasOmnia/hermes-custom-pack (56 stars, last pushed 27d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 13,324 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it B with 1 finding (asks for root). It is 100% identical to specification-compliance-review, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

dogfood

This skill guides you through systematic exploratory QA testing of web applications using the browser toolset. You will navigate the application, interact with elements, capture evidence of issues, and produce a structured bug report.

AtlasOmnia/donna-starter · 20 tokens

simulate-agents

Run Mock User and Auditor agents against a feature in fresh contexts before human review. Use after verify-work, before request-review, when user wants pre-review simulation.

danielvm-git/bigpowers · 36 tokens

preview-spec

Makes a UI pull request autonomously verifiable. author generates a step-by-step UI verification spec for the PR's visual change and injects it into the PR description as a collapsed, machine-findable block (delegated to by create-pr on UI diffs; also runnable standalone). run extracts that block, resolves the PR's…

mthines/agent-skills · 223 tokens

acceptance

Test a PR review end to end and prove it honoured every guarantee in INVARIANTS.md. Use when asked to test/validate a review of a pull request, to check a finished run, or to run the 3-provider x 2-runtime acceptance matrix. Drives pr-review verify and scripts/acceptance.mjs — never hand-checks the guarantees.

guimatheus92/pr-review · 80 tokens

readme-template

Standard README template for repos — professional structure with badges, overview, table of contents, features/modules, stack, installation, configuration, tests, security, structure, docs, roadmap, contribute, license, author + RepoActivity sections (Star History, repo stats) + profile GIF footer. Use when creating…

pedroiff0/awesome-skills · 72 tokens

docker-single-port-multi-instance

Consolidate multiple Docker Compose app instances (production / test / demo) behind ONE host port using an nginx reverse proxy that routes by URL path prefix (e.g. /demo). Use when a user wants 'one port, several apps/banks' or a demo reachable simultaneously from the main landing page with its own database.

pedroiff0/awesome-skills · 73 tokens