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/duthaho/claudekit/shape-specnpx skills add duthaho/claudekit --skill shape-specgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/duthaho/claudekitWrote 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/duthaho/claudekit/shape-spec)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/duthaho/claudekit/shape-spec"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/duthaho/claudekit/shape-spec.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 | $0.00102 | $0.02758 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00051 | $0.01379 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00552 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00276 |
Grade A, and why
shape-spec 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 5d 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 — 198 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Shape Spec
Overview
A short structured workflow that turns a vague request ("we need to add X") into a written spec that can be reviewed and planned against. The skill exists because the most expensive engineering bug is the wrong feature shipped well — and the second most expensive is the right feature with a missing constraint nobody wrote down. A spec is not a plan; it does not answer "how." It answers what, why, and what's out of bounds. The deliverable is a one-to-three page Markdown document a teammate can read in 5 minutes and sign off on, or push back against. Used before any plan is written.
When to Use
- A feature has been discussed informally and someone needs to write it down
- Multiple stakeholders disagree on scope and you need a shared text to argue against
- The change touches more than one module or service (multi-team coordination)
- A previous attempt at this work was abandoned or shipped wrong, and you're not sure why
- You're about to start
/claudekit:write-planand realize you can't define acceptance criteria yet
When NOT to Use
- The change is one-line, single-file, single-author
- A spec already exists; you should be reviewing it, not rewriting it
- You're in the middle of debugging — debugging produces a fix, not a spec.
Use
/claudekit:investigate-root-cause.
Process
Step 0: Size the change
Goal: Scale the ceremony to the change before spending it. A full spec on a one-line fix trains people to skip the whole discipline; no spec on a multi-module change is how the missing constraint ships.
Actions:
- Classify the change (when unsure between two tiers, pick the smaller and say so
— the plan contract upgrades it later if the work grows):
- Trivial — one-line / single-file / describable in one sentence. Stop
here — no spec. Make the change, then go straight to
verification-gateandcode-review-loop. - Small — one focused change, ≤ ~3 files, design obvious. Skip the spec
and plan-review; hand off to
write-planfor a lightweight inline plan. - Standard — multi-file, multi-session, or real design decisions. Continue to Step 1 and write the full spec.
- Trivial — one-line / single-file / describable in one sentence. Stop
here — no spec. Make the change, then go straight to
- Whatever the tier, the evidence never scales to zero:
verification-gateruns andcode-review-loopreviews any shipped diff. Ceremony is what scales, not the gate. (Full tier table: README "Sizing the work".)
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 198 lines · 102 tokens per session scan A e8117f3b4912
shape-spec is a skill published in the GitHub repository duthaho/claudekit (97 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 102 tokens to every session and 2,758 once invoked, about $0.0005 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
writing-workflow-skills
Use when adding a new workflow skill to pi-thinkrail-workflow, changing an existing workflow skill's role, trigger, handoff, or structure, or checking a workflow skill against the workflow system's rules. Not for authoring general-purpose skills outside this package.
writing-specs
Use when a workflow step drafts or revises a spec artifact — a goal-and-requirements, an architecture, or a module SPEC — or when a workflow skill names it at such a step. The shared quality bar for specs — not a workflow, nothing to execute.
self-assessment
Interactive skill assessment with personalized learning path generation.
source-command-methodology-advisor
Analyzes your codebase and asks 3 targeted questions to recommend the right AI-assisted development methodology stack.
methodology-advisor
Analyzes your codebase and asks 3 targeted questions to recommend the right AI-assisted development methodology stack.
release-notes
Generate release notes in multiple formats from git commits.