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/firstp1ck/pi-coding-agent-forge/spec-vs-impl-checkernpx skills add Firstp1ck/pi-coding-agent-forge --skill spec-vs-impl-checkergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Firstp1ck/pi-coding-agent-forgeWrote 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/firstp1ck/pi-coding-agent-forge/spec-vs-impl-checker)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/firstp1ck/pi-coding-agent-forge/spec-vs-impl-checker"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/firstp1ck/pi-coding-agent-forge/spec-vs-impl-checker.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 | $0.00048 | $0.00844 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00024 | $0.00422 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00169 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00084 |
Grade A, and why
spec-vs-impl-checker 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 — 107 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Spec-vs-Implementation Checker
Systematically verify that every specification requirement is implemented correctly.
Process
Step 1 — Build Requirement Registry
Extract every requirement from the spec and combined plan into a structured registry:
| Req ID | Source | Section | Requirement | Type |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| REQ-001 | spec.md | 4.1 | Users can register with email/password | Functional |
| REQ-002 | spec.md | 4.1 | Email must be validated (format + uniqueness) | Validation |
| REQ-003 | combined-plan.md | 2 | Passwords hashed with bcrypt (cost 12) | Security |
| REQ-004 | architecture.md | 3.2 | Auth module exposes /api/auth/* endpoints | Interface |
Step 2 — Trace to Implementation
For each requirement, find the implementing code:
| Req ID | Implementation | File(s) | Test(s) | Status |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| REQ-001 | register() handler | src/auth/handlers.rs:45 | test_register | VERIFIED |
| REQ-002 | validate_email() | src/auth/validation.rs:12 | test_email_validation | VERIFIED |
| REQ-003 | hash_password() | src/auth/crypto.rs:8 | — | UNTESTED |
| REQ-004 | router config | src/auth/mod.rs:20 | test_auth_routes | VERIFIED |
Step 3 — Verify Each Requirement
For each traced requirement:
- Read the code — Does the implementation match what the spec describes?
- Check the tests — Is there a test that verifies this specific requirement?
- Run the test — Does the test actually pass?
- Check edge cases — Does the implementation handle the edge cases the spec implies?
Status values:
| Status | Meaning |
|---|---|
| VERIFIED | Implemented correctly, tested, test passes |
| IMPLEMENTED | Code exists but no specific test |
| UNTESTED | Code exists, test exists but doesn't cover this requirement |
| PARTIAL | Partially implemented (e.g., happy path only, missing error handling) |
| MISSING | No implementation found for this requirement |
| DEVIATED | Implementation differs from spec (document how) |
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 First seen · 107 lines · 48 tokens per session scan A ca8a7dfe3a1c
spec-vs-impl-checker is a skill published in the GitHub repository Firstp1ck/pi-coding-agent-forge (77 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 48 tokens to every session and 844 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
github-release-management
Comprehensive GitHub release orchestration with AI swarm coordination for automated versioning, testing, deployment, and rollback management.
flow-nexus-platform
Comprehensive Flow Nexus platform management - authentication, sandboxes, app deployment, payments, and challenges.
github-code-review
Comprehensive GitHub code review with AI-powered swarm coordination.
github-multi-repo
Multi-repository coordination, synchronization, and architecture management with AI swarm orchestration.
github-project-management
Comprehensive GitHub project management with swarm-coordinated issue tracking, project board automation, and sprint planning.
github-workflow-automation
Advanced GitHub Actions workflow automation with AI swarm coordination, intelligent CI/CD pipelines, and comprehensive repository management.