Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to DesignPipe/exfig. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/DesignPipe/exfig/main/.claude/skills/openspec-bulk-archive-change/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/DesignPipe/exfigWrote 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/designpipe/exfig/openspec-bulk-archive-change)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/designpipe/exfig/openspec-bulk-archive-change"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/designpipe/exfig/openspec-bulk-archive-change.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 | $0.00023 | $0.01851 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00925 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00370 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00185 |
Grade A, and why
openspec-bulk-archive-change 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 6d 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.
This is a copy
77% identical to molfeat — 453 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 247 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Archive multiple completed changes in a single operation.
This skill allows you to batch-archive changes, handling spec conflicts intelligently by checking the codebase to determine what's actually implemented.
Input: None required (prompts for selection)
Steps
-
Get active changes
Run
openspec list --jsonto get all active changes.If no active changes exist, inform user and stop.
-
Prompt for change selection
Use AskUserQuestion tool with multi-select to let user choose changes:
- Show each change with its schema
- Include an option for "All changes"
- Allow any number of selections (1+ works, 2+ is the typical use case)
IMPORTANT: Do NOT auto-select. Always let the user choose.
-
Batch validation - gather status for all selected changes
For each selected change, collect:
a. Artifact status - Run
openspec status --change "<name>" --json- Parse
schemaNameandartifactslist - Note which artifacts are
donevs other states
b. Task completion - Read
openspec/changes/<name>/tasks.md- Count
- [ ](incomplete) vs- [x](complete) - If no tasks file exists, note as "No tasks"
c. Delta specs - Check
openspec/changes/<name>/specs/directory- List which capability specs exist
- For each, extract requirement names (lines matching
### Requirement: <name>)
- Parse
-
Detect spec conflicts
Build a map of
capability -> [changes that touch it]:auth -> [change-a, change-b] <- CONFLICT (2+ changes) api -> [change-c] <- OK (only 1 change)A conflict exists when 2+ selected changes have delta specs for the same capability.
-
Resolve conflicts agentically
For each conflict, investigate the codebase:
a. Read the delta specs from each conflicting change to understand what each claims to add/modify
b. Search the codebase for implementation evidence:
- Look for code implementing requirements from each delta spec
- Check for related files, functions, or tests
c. Determine resolution:
- If only one change is actually implemented -> sync that one's specs
- If both implemented -> apply in chronological order (older first, newer overwrites)
- If neither implemented -> skip spec sync, warn user
d. Record resolution for each conflict:
- Which change's specs to apply
- In what order (if both)
- Rationale (what was found in codebase)
-
Show consolidated status table
Display a table summarizing all changes:
| Change | Artifacts | Tasks | Specs | Conflicts | Status | |---------------------|-----------|-------|---------|-----------|--------| | schema-management | Done | 5/5 | 2 delta | None | Ready | | project-config | Done | 3/3 | 1 delta | None | Ready | | add-oauth | Done | 4/4 | 1 delta | auth (!) | Ready* | | add-verify-skill | 1 left | 2/5 | None | None | Warn |For conflicts, show the resolution:
* Conflict resolution: - auth spec: Will apply add-oauth then add-jwt (both implemented, chronological order)For incomplete changes, show warnings:
Warnings: - add-verify-skill: 1 incomplete artifact, 3 incomplete tasks -
Confirm batch operation
Use AskUserQuestion tool with a single confirmation:
- "Archive N changes?" with options based on status
- Options might include:
- "Archive all N changes"
- "Archive only N ready changes (skip incomplete)"
- "Cancel"
If there are incomplete changes, make clear they'll be archived with warnings.
-
Execute archive for each confirmed change
Process changes in the determined order (respecting conflict resolution):
a. Sync specs if delta specs exist:
- Use the openspec-sync-specs approach (agent-driven intelligent merge)
- For conflicts, apply in resolved order
- Track if sync was done
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 247 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A d3f369c1e67f
openspec-bulk-archive-change is a skill published in the GitHub repository DesignPipe/exfig (10 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 23 tokens to every session and 1,851 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 77% identical to molfeat, differing in 453 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
discussion
Skill "discussion" from naver/design-to-ui, covering discussion — 사용 경험을 discussions로 축적, 카테고리 (등록 대상), steps, step 1: 의도·코멘트 파악 and step 2: 정보 수집 (이 스킬의 핵심 — 3개 출처, 날조 금지).
flutter
Use when building, structuring, testing or optimizing a Flutter app — feature-first layering, Riverpod 3 or Bloc, typed gorouter, freezed models, a dio data layer, Material 3, jank hunting, widget/golden tests. Targets Flutter 3.44 / Dart 3.12. NOT React Native (that is react-native), NOT Compose Multiplatform (that…
mobile-checkpoint
Checkpoint workflow for mobile development safety. Save/restore Android project state at critical points.
release-process
Step-by-step release checklist for Squad — prevents v0.8.22-style disasters.
design-qa
빌드된 앱 화면을 실기기/시뮬레이터에서 캡처해 Figma 원본과 오버레이(50% 블렌드 + diff 히트맵 + figma|real 나란히 크롭 + 픽셀색 비교)로 대조하고, 코드 오차로 확정된 항목을 Figma 선언값으로 되짚어 스스로 보정하는 검증 루프. 비교·측정 엔진은 플랫폼 중립이고 캡처 계층만 플랫폼별이다(Android·iOS·Web 지원). 두 진입: ① codegen Step 7c 위임 호출, ② 직접 호출(/design-qa) — 프롬프트로 검증/보정 모드를 판별하고 Figma 링크 해소·현재 브랜치 빌드·캡처까지 스스로 오케스트레이션. "오버레이…
design-to-ui
Figma 디자인을 네이티브 UI(Android Compose/XML, iOS SwiftUI/UIKit)로 변환하는 7-Step 워크플로우. 노드 추출·디자인 컨텍스트·검증(Step 1·2·3·7)은 플랫폼 공통이고, 에셋(Step 4·5)과 코드 생성(Step 6)만 플랫폼별 reference로 분기한다. 에셋 A/B/C 분류, 동적 비주얼, project-design-system 위임, 플랫폼 에셋 파이프라인을 포함한다. Figma URL이나 UI 변환 요청 시 이 스킬을 사용하세요.