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/plan)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/chan4lk/specclaw/plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/chan4lk/specclaw/plan.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 | $0.00056 | $0.02416 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00028 | $0.01208 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00483 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00242 |
Grade A, and why
plan 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 2d 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 — 74 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
specclaw plan
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).
Turn an approved proposal into an executable plan.
Flags
-
--author-spec— delegate spec authoring to thespec-authorsubagent for an interactive, technique-driven dialogue (5 Whys, Jobs-to-be-Done, Inversion, Pre-mortem, MoSCoW). When this flag is present, pause for explicit user approval ofspec.mdbefore generatingdesign.mdandtasks.md. Without the flag, behavior is unchanged (single-shot generation, no dialogue) so/specclaw:autoremains non-interactive.Detect the flag as a whitespace-delimited token anywhere in ARGUMENTS (positional-agnostic), and strip it before using the rest of ARGUMENTS as
<change>.
- Validate: run
specclaw-validate-change .specclaw <change> plan. If it fails, report missing prerequisites and stop. - Read
.specclaw/changes/<change>/proposal.md. - Analyze the existing codebase (file structure, patterns, dependencies relevant to the change). Also read
.specclaw/context.mdif it exists — it contains project-level coding rules, patterns, architecture decisions, and constraints; apply them throughout spec, design, and tasks generation.- Codebase survey: build a structured survey and keep it in your working context for spec/design/tasks generation: top-two-level directory summary (e.g. from
git ls-files | cut -d/ -f1-2 | sort -u), detected manifests (package.json,pyproject.toml,go.mod,Cargo.toml,*.csproj,pom.xml,Makefile, ...) and the languages/tooling they imply, and where tests live. - Discovered project docs: run
specclaw-discover-context .specclaw listto see ranked candidate docs (rank, line count, path), thenspecclaw-discover-context .specclaw emitfor the budget-capped digest. Read the digest and apply the project's documented conventions, constraints, and non-goals throughout planning. Prefer docs most relevant to this change when deciding what to read in depth. Cite your evidence: when a spec requirement, design decision, or task constraint comes from a discovered doc, name the doc path and quote the exact line(s) it rests on — never attribute a claim to a doc without a quote. If discovery is disabled or finds nothing, both commands print nothing — skip this step silently. - Promoted spec knowledge: read
.specclaw/knowledge/spec-guidelines.mdif it exists — it holds spec/design guidance promoted from earlier build learnings; apply it when writingspec.mdanddesign.md. 3b. Dependency bypass carry-through. Ifproposal.mdhas a## Dependency Bypasssection, read.specclaw/analysis/module-stubs.mdfor each citedST-###and read$CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT/references/stub-discipline.md. The spec is where a bypass stops being a scheduling decision and becomes build obligations — carry it forward explicitly in all three files:
- Codebase survey: build a structured survey and keep it in your working context for spec/design/tasks generation: top-two-level directory summary (e.g. from
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.
- 2d ago Changed · +29 lines cab0c8a58b8a
- 7d ago First seen · 45 lines · 56 tokens per session scan A eadcd8b04fd1
plan is a skill published in the GitHub repository chan4lk/specclaw (12 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 56 tokens to every session and 2,416 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
from-intake
A workflow for reviewing material brought from another workspace and carrying relevant brand evidence into the project's assets. It checks inventories, brand guides, logos, and image sources before anything is used.
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-spec
A feature-specification workflow that turns a feature request into a Markdown file describing screens, acceptance checks, boundaries, and unanswered questions.