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 skills add attilaszasz/sdd-pilot --skill artifact-conventionsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/attilaszasz/sdd-pilotWrote 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/skills/attilaszasz/sdd-pilot/artifact-conventions)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/attilaszasz/sdd-pilot/artifact-conventions"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/attilaszasz/sdd-pilot/artifact-conventions/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/skills/attilaszasz/sdd-pilot/artifact-conventions"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/attilaszasz/sdd-pilot/artifact-conventions.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 2 findings, up to medium
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- medium Excessive Agency · line 154 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
- medium Excessive Agency · line 159 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
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 | $0.00059 | $0.03521 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00030 | $0.01760 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00704 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00352 |
Grade A, and why
artifact-conventions 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 8d 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 — 162 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Runtime primer:
AGENTS.md§Artifact Conventions. This file is the expanded canonical reference for rationale, exceptions, and remediation details; it is not a required read for ordinary workflow execution.scripts/drift-report.mjs --strictchecks parity for the runtime-critical contract.
Artifact Convention Rules
These rules apply whenever an agent reads or modifies files inside a Feature Workspace at specs/<feature-folder>/. The ADR preservation rules in this file also apply to standalone ADRs under specs/adrs/. They protect the integrity of cross-referenced identifiers, gating state, and structural conventions that downstream phases depend on. They do not apply to other Project Context Specs such as specs/prd.md, specs/sad.md, specs/dod.md, specs/project-plan.md, or epic detail files under specs/plan/.
Preservation Rules
These are non-negotiable guardrails — violating them breaks cross-artifact traceability and phase gating.
| Rule | Rationale |
|---|---|
| Do NOT reorder product user story priorities or non-product objective priorities (P1, P2, P3) without explicit user approval | Priority order drives task phasing and MVP scope — reordering silently changes what ships first |
| Do NOT change task IDs (T001, T002…) | Task IDs are cross-referenced in coverage maps, dependency graphs, and issue trackers |
| Do NOT change checklist IDs (CHK001, CHK002…) | Checklist IDs are referenced externally by quality-assurance checks and test evaluators |
Preserve checkbox state (- [ ] vs - [X]) |
Checkbox state is a gating signal — flipping it can unblock or block downstream phases |
Do NOT change requirement IDs (FR-001, TR-001, OR-001, RR-001) |
Requirement IDs are mapped to tasks, coverage reports, and compliance checks |
| Do NOT change success criteria IDs (SC-001, SC-002…) | Success criteria IDs are referenced in phase reviews and validation |
| Do NOT change architecture decision IDs (AD-001, AD-002…) | Architecture decision IDs may be referenced by tasks and implementation agents |
Do NOT rename, renumber, or delete standalone ADR files under specs/adrs/ |
ADR file paths are stable references; ADR-NNNN numbers are monotonic, never reused, and cross-referenced by project-plan epics, plan traceability tags {SAD:ADR-NNNN}, and sad.md catalog rows |
| Do NOT write standalone ADR files outside the ADR Author subagent | All ADR file mutations must flow through .github/agents/_adr-author.md per the MADR authoring contract |
| Do NOT change stress-test finding IDs (STF-001, STF-002…) | Stress-test finding IDs are referenced by [NEEDS CLARIFICATION: STF-###] markers and adversarial analysis reports |
[VERIFY: <command>] command text is NOT a cross-referenced ID — it may be edited/corrected to reflect the real check |
Unlike T###/FR-###/AD-### IDs, VERIFY command text is an executable assertion, not a stable reference; updating a broken command (wrong path, stale flag) is a normal maintenance edit, not an ID violation |
Respect [NEEDS CLARIFICATION] markers — only resolve with user-approved answers |
Silently removing a marker hides unresolved ambiguity that may affect scope, security, or UX |
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 162 lines · 59 tokens per session scan A 153776104500
artifact-conventions is a skill published in the GitHub repository attilaszasz/sdd-pilot (96 stars, last pushed 7d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 59 tokens to every session and 3,521 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 skills, from other repositories
universal-live-check
Universal live-check framework for coding agents. Executes incremental, deterministic validation across all software domains (CLI, backend, frontend, mobile, embedded, libs). Change-type-aware (feat, fix, hotfix, refactor, migrate, docs). Triggers whenever an agent needs to validate code quality, run linting, perform…
code-review-hardening
Use this skill for rigorous, structured code review with a self-repair loop. Applies change-type-aware strategies (feat, fix, hotfix, refactor, migrate, docs). Findings are severity-classified, then auto-fixed where possible. Triggers on PR reviews, code review requests, or when reviewing any change set.
contextual-stewardship
Use this skill when the user makes a technical decision, establishes a new pattern, defines business rules, or explicitly asks to remember or save a guideline. Also use this skill when you are about to implement a feature, write code, plan an architecture, or make a technical decision - you MUST retrieve contextual…
project-guidelines-writer
Use this skill when the user wants repository guidance documents generated or refreshed, including AGENTS.md, CONTRIBUTING.md, STYLEGUIDE.md, TESTING.md, ARCHITECTURE.md, and SECURITY.md. It analyzes the repository, generates all six guideline files by default, prefers managed-section updates for existing files, and…
quality-grading
Use this skill to grade code, specifications, or design documents across four quality dimensions using a 1-5 scoring scale. In grade-and-fix mode, the skill auto-improves artifacts scoring below 5 without prompting. Invoke when you want consistent quality assessment on design, implementation, or specification with…
spec-driven-task-decomposer
Use this skill when approved requirements and design need to be decomposed into tasks.md for Phase 3 of a Spec-Driven change. It creates atomic, traceable implementation and testing tasks, validates the plan, and should not be used to design architecture or write implementation code.