opsx-verify

opsx-verify is a skill for Claude Code, Codex from fjpulidop/specrails-core. It costs 31 tokens per session (1,622 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A checker for comparing implemented code with OpenSpec change documents, such as requirements, design notes, and task lists.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to validate that an OpenSpec change is fully implemented and that the code, requirements, design, and tasks agree.
Why use it?
It helps find unfinished tasks, incorrect behavior, or inconsistencies before a planned change is archived.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Written for no agent in particular: nothing here depends on one. Also seen: names the AskUserQuestion tool.

Part of the specrails plugin — 28 skills, 14 agents shipped together

Good fit Use it to validate that an OpenSpec change is fully implemented and that the code, requirements, design, and tasks agree.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/fjpulidop/specrails-core/opsx-verify
Install

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.

Any agent
npx skills add fjpulidop/specrails-core --skill opsx-verify
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/fjpulidop/specrails-core

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Or install specrails, the plugin that ships this one along with the rest of its 28 skills, 14 agents.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for opsx-verify

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/fjpulidop/specrails-core/opsx-verify.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/fjpulidop/specrails-core/opsx-verify)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/fjpulidop/specrails-core/opsx-verify"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/fjpulidop/specrails-core/opsx-verify.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>
Per session 31 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,622 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00031 $0.01622
Opus 5 $0.00015 $0.00811
Sonnet 5 $0.00006 $0.00324
Haiku 4.5 $0.00003 $0.00162

Measured 8d ago against content hash 2ac33ccc34a6, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

opsx-verify 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 8d 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.

specrails-plugin/skills/opsx-verify/SKILL.md · 177 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 177 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

OpenSpec project root. The openspec/ directory lives in the REPO, not the workspace this skill is driven from. The repo root is ${SPECRAILS_REPO_DIR:-.} (a default-unset env var: when unset it resolves to ., i.e. the current directory, so a classic in-repo run is unchanged). Run EVERY openspec command against that root — wrap each invocation as (cd "${SPECRAILS_REPO_DIR:-.}" && openspec …). Treat ${SPECRAILS_REPO_DIR:-.} as the OpenSpec project root for any path the CLI prints or you read/write.

Verify that an implementation matches the change artifacts (specs, tasks, design).

Input: Optionally specify a change name. If omitted, check if it can be inferred from conversation context. If vague or ambiguous you MUST prompt for available changes.

Steps

  1. If no change name provided, prompt for selection

    Run openspec list --json to get available changes. Use the AskUserQuestion tool to let the user select.

    Show changes that have implementation tasks (tasks artifact exists). Include the schema used for each change if available. Mark changes with incomplete tasks as "(In Progress)".

    IMPORTANT: Do NOT guess or auto-select a change. Always let the user choose.

  2. Check status to understand the schema

    (cd "${SPECRAILS_REPO_DIR:-.}" && openspec status --change "<name>" --json)
    

    Parse the JSON to understand:

    • schemaName: The workflow being used (e.g., "spec-driven")
    • Which artifacts exist for this change
  3. Get the change directory and load artifacts

    (cd "${SPECRAILS_REPO_DIR:-.}" && openspec instructions apply --change "<name>" --json)
    

    This returns the change directory and context files. Read all available artifacts from contextFiles.

  4. Initialize verification report structure

    Create a report structure with three dimensions:

    • Completeness: Track tasks and spec coverage
    • Correctness: Track requirement implementation and scenario coverage
    • Coherence: Track design adherence and pattern consistency

    Each dimension can have CRITICAL, WARNING, or SUGGESTION issues.

  5. Verify Completeness

    Task Completion:

    • If tasks.md exists in contextFiles, read it
    • Parse checkboxes: - [ ] (incomplete) vs - [x] (complete)
    • Count complete vs total tasks
    • If incomplete tasks exist:
      • Add CRITICAL issue for each incomplete task
      • Recommendation: "Complete task: " or "Mark as done if already implemented"

    Spec Coverage:

    • If delta specs exist in openspec/changes/<name>/specs/:
      • Extract all requirements (marked with "### Requirement:")
      • For each requirement:
        • Search codebase for keywords related to the requirement
        • Assess if implementation likely exists
      • If requirements appear unimplemented:
        • Add CRITICAL issue: "Requirement not found: "
        • Recommendation: "Implement requirement X: "
  6. Verify Correctness

    Requirement Implementation Mapping:

    • For each requirement from delta specs:
      • Search codebase for implementation evidence
      • If found, note file paths and line ranges
      • Assess if implementation matches requirement intent
      • If divergence detected:
        • Add WARNING: "Implementation may diverge from spec: "
        • Recommendation: "Review : against requirement X"

    Scenario Coverage:

    • For each scenario in delta specs (marked with "#### Scenario:"):
      • Check if conditions are handled in code
      • Check if tests exist covering the scenario
      • If scenario appears uncovered:
        • Add WARNING: "Scenario not covered: "
        • Recommendation: "Add test or implementation for scenario: "
  7. Verify Coherence

    Design Adherence:

    • If design.md exists in contextFiles:
      • Extract key decisions (look for sections like "Decision:", "Approach:", "Architecture:")
      • Verify implementation follows those decisions
      • If contradiction detected:
        • Add WARNING: "Design decision not followed: "
        • Recommendation: "Update implementation or revise design.md to match reality"
    • If no design.md: Skip design adherence check, note "No design.md to verify against"

Read the full file on GitHub · 177 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 8d ago First seen · 177 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A 2ac33ccc34a6

Subscribe to this mod's changes

opsx-verify is a skill published in the GitHub repository fjpulidop/specrails-core (9 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 1,622 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 2026-08-31.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

review-loop

Run the adversarial verification loop — implement, then hand the change to a fresh checker that did not write it, fix what it finds, and re-dispatch until APPROVE. Use before claiming any behavioural change is done, and on requests like "review loop", "adversarial review", "independent review", "get this verified"…

sangrokjung/claude-forge · 100 tokens

security-review

Perform a focused security review of pending git changes to identify high-confidence security vulnerabilities with real exploitation potential. Use this skill when the user asks for a security review, security audit, vulnerability scan, or wants to check pending changes on a branch for security issues before merging.…

waybarrios/opencode-power-pack · 64 tokens

huggingface-llm-trainer

Train or fine-tune language models with TRL or Unsloth on Hugging Face Jobs, including SFT, DPO, GRPO, reward models, and GGUF conversion. Use for cloud LLM training; use huggingface-vision-trainer for vision tasks.

waybarrios/opencode-power-pack · 65 tokens

huggingface-vision-trainer

Train object-detection, image-classification, or SAM segmentation models on Hugging Face Jobs. Use for vision fine-tuning and evaluation; use huggingface-llm-trainer for language models.

waybarrios/opencode-power-pack · 48 tokens

differential-review

Performs security-focused differential review of code changes (PRs, commits, diffs). Adapts analysis depth to codebase size, uses git history for context, calculates blast radius, checks test coverage, and generates comprehensive markdown reports. Automatically detects and prevents security regressions.

waybarrios/opencode-power-pack · 61 tokens

huggingface-paper-publisher

Publish and manage research papers on Hugging Face Hub. Supports creating paper pages, linking papers to models/datasets, claiming authorship, and generating professional markdown-based research articles.

waybarrios/opencode-power-pack · 42 tokens