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 dean0x/devflow --skill gap-analysisgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/dean0x/devflowWrote 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/dean0x/devflow/gap-analysis)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/dean0x/devflow/gap-analysis"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dean0x/devflow/gap-analysis/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/dean0x/devflow/gap-analysis"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dean0x/devflow/gap-analysis.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00017 | $0.01240 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00496 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00248 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00124 |
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 4d 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 — 136 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
2 files 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.
- 4d ago Changed · -16 lines 159091b3cb39
- 7d ago Changed · -24 tokens per session 9117f347ea7c
- 17d ago Changed edadfc868c38
- 1mo ago First seen · 152 lines · 41 tokens per session scan A 6904993beb56
gap-analysis is a skill published in the GitHub repository dean0x/devflow (20 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 17 tokens to every session and 1,240 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
find-simplifications
Use for a periodic repo-wide sweep of qwen-code for accumulated excess surface — dead components and files, orphaned locale keys, exports nothing consumes, added-then-removed scaffolding — filing candidates on a tracking issue and landing only what a maintainer has said yes to. Repo-wide and evidence-first; every…
swarm-pr-review
Run a graph-guided, tool-augmented PR review using context packing, parallel exploration, mandatory repository-agnostic risk-family coverage with dispatch scaled to diff size and risk, independent reviewer validation, critic challenge, and metrics writeback. Use for deep pull request review with low false-positive…
pr-review-canvas
Create a OpenBitFun Canvas for reviewing a pull request, branch diff, or change set with Cursor-style diff cards, review maps, risk callouts, and focused reviewer flow. Use when the user asks for a PR review canvas, diff walkthrough, change-set overview, or visual review summary.
code-review
You are a senior code reviewer. You receive diffs via stdin.
review
Adversarial fresh-context review and risk check of an increment before it ships; every finding cites path:line and is re-verified. Use for "review", "qa", "quality check", "critique this".
tech-debt-ci-review
Codex adapter for deep technical-debt and CI-stability audits. Use when asked to find test theater, flaky tests, missing or mis-scoped tests, brittle CI/toolchain behavior, structural debt blocking green PRs, or a remediation order for opencode-swarm.