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/dean0x/devflow/gap-analysisnpx skills add dean0x/devflow --skill gap-analysisgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/dean0x/devflowWhat 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 | $0.00041 | $0.01540 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00770 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00308 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00154 |
Grade A, and why
gap-analysis 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 yesterday.
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 — 152 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Gap Analysis
Domain expertise for detecting gaps in design documents, specifications, and plans before implementation begins.
Iron Law
GAPS IN DESIGN BECOME BUGS IN PRODUCTION
Every undefined error state, vague requirement, and missing integration point is a bug waiting to be written. Catch gaps in the plan so the implementation reflects reality, not assumption. Evidence-required: every gap must cite specific text from the artifact.
Focus Areas
1. Completeness
Detect missing pieces that will block or break implementation.
Detection patterns:
- Missing acceptance criteria — requirements without testable success conditions
- Undefined error states — happy path described, failure paths absent
- Vague requirements — "fast", "secure", "user-friendly" without measurable thresholds
- Ambiguous user journeys — "user submits form" without specifying what happens next
- Missing rollback specification — no recovery path if operation partially fails
- Unspecified data constraints — fields mentioned without type, size, or validation rules
Evidence trigger: Any requirement phrase that cannot be directly translated into a test case.
2. Architecture
Detect design decisions that conflict with existing patterns or create structural problems.
Detection patterns:
- Implied patterns violating existing conventions — new module structure that contradicts codebase layout
- Missing integration points — feature touches shared state but integration method unspecified
- Layering issues — business logic pushed to wrong layer (e.g., validation in presentation layer)
- Undeclared dependencies — feature needs data/service not mentioned in scope
- Missing schema changes — new data structure implied but migration not mentioned
- Shared resource contention — multiple features/requests accessing same resource without concurrency plan
Evidence trigger: Any design element that references an existing system component without specifying the integration contract.
What ships with it
1 file beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- yesterday First seen · 152 lines · 41 tokens per session scan A 6904993beb56
gap-analysis is a skill published in the GitHub repository dean0x/devflow (19 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 41 tokens to every session and 1,540 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
data-engineering
Skill "data-engineering" from fengshao1227/ccg-workflow, covering 数据工程域 · data engineering, 域概览, 数据管道编排, 框架对比 and airflow 核心模式.
verify-change
变更校验关卡。分析代码变更，检测文档同步状态，评估变更影响范围。当用户提到变更检查、文档同步、代码审查、提交前检查、diff分析时使用。在设计级变更、重构完成时自动触发。.
verify-security
安全校验关卡。自动扫描代码安全漏洞，检测危险模式，确保安全决策有文档记录。当用户提到安全扫描、漏洞检测、安全审计、代码安全、OWASP、注入检测、敏感信息泄露时使用。在新建模块、安全相关变更、攻防任务、重构完成时自动触发。.
liquid-glass
Apple Liquid Glass design system. Use when building UI with translucent, depth-aware glass morphism following Apple's design language. Provides CSS tokens, component patterns, dark/light mode, and animation specs.
gen-docs
文档生成器。自动分析模块结构，生成 README.md 和 DESIGN.md 骨架。当用户提到生成文档、创建README、创建DESIGN、文档骨架、文档模板时使用。在新建模块开始时自动触发。.
verify-module
模块完整性校验关卡。扫描目录结构、检测缺失文档、验证代码与文档同步。当用户提到模块校验、文档检查、结构完整性、README检查、DESIGN检查时使用。在新建模块完成时自动触发。.