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 digital-stoic-org/agent-skills --skill openspec-plangit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/digital-stoic-org/agent-skillsWrote 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/digital-stoic-org/agent-skills/openspec-plan)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/digital-stoic-org/agent-skills/openspec-plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/digital-stoic-org/agent-skills/openspec-plan/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/digital-stoic-org/agent-skills/openspec-plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/digital-stoic-org/agent-skills/openspec-plan.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 3 findings, up to high
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- high Tool Misuse · line 53 Tool parameters are crafted to achieve unintended or unsafe behavior. Parameter abuse can bypass intended safety checks (e.g. shell=True, --force, dangerous glob patterns).Fix: Validate all tool parameters against an allowlist. Reject dangerous parameter values (shell=True, --force, -rf /) and use safe defaults.
- high Tool Misuse · line 105 Tool parameters are crafted to achieve unintended or unsafe behavior. Parameter abuse can bypass intended safety checks (e.g. shell=True, --force, dangerous glob patterns).Fix: Validate all tool parameters against an allowlist. Reject dangerous parameter values (shell=True, --force, -rf /) and use safe defaults.
- medium Excessive Agency · line 4 Skill selects an external model or provider that may use a different account or billing plan than the operator expects. Undisclosed model switches can cause unexpected cost or quota consumption.Fix: Remove the model/provider override or disclose it prominently and require explicit operator approval before invoking an external coding CLI or billed model.
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 | $0.00032 | $0.01438 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00575 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00288 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00144 |
Grade A, and why
openspec-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 1mo 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 — 126 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
OpenSpec Plan
Analysis + reasoning engine for change proposals. Assumes decision made (via /brainstorm or direct request).
Workflow: Analyze → Reason → Generate
| Phase | Purpose | Model | Thinking |
|---|---|---|---|
| Analyze | Explore codebase, find affected files | Sonnet | off |
| Reason | Dependencies, risks, integration points | Sonnet | on |
| Generate | Write artifacts from analysis | Sonnet | off |
Exploration: Consult openspec/project.md → Exploration Strategy section for tools and must-read files.
Philosophy: Consult openspec/project.md → Execution Philosophy section for current mode and principles.
Commands
create
Create change proposal from codebase analysis.
Input: $ARGUMENTS = change-id: Brief description
Workflow:
- Analyze: Explore codebase for affected files/patterns (Glob, Grep, Read)
- Reason (thinking on): Identify dependencies, risks, integration points
- Philosophy check: Read Execution Philosophy mode, align proposal scope with principles
- Research (optional): Web search for framework docs/patterns if needed
- Confirm: Present findings to user before writing
- Generate: Write proposal.md with analysis-driven content
Philosophy alignment: Include ## Execution Philosophy Alignment section in proposal (see reference.md for template).
Output: openspec/changes/{change-id}/proposal.md with Why/What/Impact from analysis
Next step (ALWAYS display after writing proposal.md):
✅ proposal.md written → Next: /openspec-design design {change-id} → Then: /openspec-plan tasks {change-id}
tasks
Generate outcome-centric tasks + test strategy from proposal.
Input: $ARGUMENTS = change-id [--skip-design] [--skip-test]
Sources (read before generating):
openspec/changes/{id}/proposal.md(required)openspec/changes/{id}/design.md(required unless--skip-design)
Design gate: If design.md does NOT exist and --skip-design not passed:
- ⛔ STOP — do not generate tasks
- Display:
⚠️ No design.md found. Run /openspec-design design {change-id} first, or pass --skip-design to bypass. - Wait for user decision
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 126 lines · 32 tokens per session scan A a05f5c5a4769
openspec-plan is a skill published in the GitHub repository digital-stoic-org/agent-skills (20 stars, last pushed 12d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 32 tokens to every session and 1,438 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 2026-09-04.
Other skills, from other repositories
story-readiness
Checks whether a story is ready to implement: clear acceptance criteria, no open questions, valid ADR and dependencies. Use when the user asks if a story, or the sprint's stories, are ready to start or build.
recipe-create-meet-space
Create a Google Meet meeting space and share the join link.
workthreads
SpecStory Workthreads - a weekly work-thread rollup across a team's repos from SpecStory coding histories (any agent - Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, Gemini, and more). It groups the window's sessions into threads of work per project and labels each new / open / recently closed, so a lead sees what shipped, what is still…
atmos-config
Atmos root configuration: atmos.yaml discovery, precedence, deep merging, basepath, imports, minimal bootstrap, and routing to narrower Atmos skills.
projects
List all managed projects with status, branch, open PRs, and open issue counts — portfolio-level view.
qa-project-bootstrap
Onboard a new QA engineer to an existing codebase, or audit an existing test architecture. Produces a 30-day ramp plan: codebase orientation, framework walkthrough, test architecture audit, mentorship pairing, and first-test guidance. Use when: "QA onboarding," "new tester," "ramp up," "test architecture audit,"…