Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add chan4lk/specclaw/plugin install specclawWrote 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/chan4lk/specclaw/bf-quality)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/chan4lk/specclaw/bf-quality"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/chan4lk/specclaw/bf-quality.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00318 | $0.03372 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00159 | $0.01686 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00064 | $0.00674 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00032 | $0.00337 |
Grade A, and why
bf-quality 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 144 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
specclaw bf-quality
First, run specclaw-ensure-init .specclaw — idempotently creates .specclaw/ if it doesn't exist (silent if already initialized; auto-inits using the current directory's basename as the project name).
Measure code quality and write .specclaw/analysis/quality.json + .specclaw/analysis/quality-report.md. Read-only side-command — no specclaw-validate-change call, no <change> involved, matching the analyze/architecture/domain/clarify pattern.
What this command is, and what it is not
This is the only place quality is judged. /specclaw:bf-analyze, /specclaw:bf-domain and /specclaw:bf-architecture answer what is this system; this answers what shape is the code in. Those are different questions and the second one is a judgement, so it lives in exactly one command — a reader never has to wonder which document a complexity number came from. Nothing here changes what any other command does.
It is also not agents/code-reviewer.md. That reads one change's diff, forms a professional opinion across ten dimensions, and gates a PR. This reads a whole tree, runs measuring tools, and compares numbers to thresholds. The two deliberately disagree on some conventions — the reviewer flags functions over ~30 lines as a matter of taste, this command's default WARN band is 60 — because one is advice to an author and the other is a metric on a legacy corpus nobody is about to hand-tidy.
Fully optional. No other command requires anything this one produces. The single exception is /specclaw:bf-rebuild-plan, which annotates its per-module rollup with quality status if quality.json happens to exist and behaves byte-for-byte identically when it does not.
Tool prerequisites
jq is required. The three metric tools are all optional and are probed at every run:
| Tool | Provides | Install |
|---|---|---|
scc |
LOC, per-file line counts, per-language file counts | go install github.com/boyter/scc/v3@latest, or a release binary |
lizard |
per-function cyclomatic complexity, function length, parameter count | pip install lizard |
jscpd |
duplication percentage | npm install -g jscpd |
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 · 144 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 91b13d93eabe
bf-quality is a skill published in the GitHub repository chan4lk/specclaw (12 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 318 tokens to every session and 3,372 once invoked, about $0.0016 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 2026-09-05.
Other skills, from other repositories
upload-assets
An asset-upload workflow that sends files to a console’s content-delivery network and prepares a review-request payload for a person to submit.
review-spec
A workflow for comparing an existing feature specification with the project's review checklist and implementation. It looks for missing requirements, differences between documented screens and actual screens, and lessons from rejected submissions.
wire-sdk
An SDK integration guide for 앱인토스, a platform for building apps inside Toss. It covers permissions, persistent storage, sharing links, screen controls, safe-area spacing, and secure WebSocket connections.
optimize-seo-geo
A workflow for filling only the SEO and GEO sections of a post's front matter. SEO helps a page appear in search results, while GEO prepares information for answer systems that may quote or cite it.
write-draft
A writing workflow that turns an outline into a full article while following a project’s content guidelines. It emphasizes clear structure, plain language, fact checking, and marked placeholders for unverified claims.
write-spec
A feature-specification workflow that turns a feature request into a Markdown file describing screens, acceptance checks, boundaries, and unanswered questions.