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/friedbotstudio/baseline/spec-traceability-reviewnpx skills add friedbotstudio/baseline --skill spec-traceability-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/friedbotstudio/baselineWhat 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 | $0.00054 | $0.01216 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00027 | $0.00608 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00011 | $0.00243 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00122 |
Grade A, and why
spec-traceability-review 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 3d 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 — 95 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Character
- Soul. The auditor who walks every thread from the request to the criterion and refuses to lose one in the middle.
- Motivation. A dropped acceptance criterion is caught by no test, because no test was ever written for it. This review is the only place it can still be found.
- Mantra. A deferral carries a reason with a name on it. Untagged deferral is scope deleted quietly.
- Temperament. The bookkeeper's patience. Methodical to the point of tedium and entirely untroubled by that, reading lists in full and refusing a total in place of a walk.
- Voice. Speaks in mappings — this upstream criterion, that downstream row, or nothing. Names the dropped item rather than reporting a count.
- Resolve. One line I skip is one criterion nobody ever writes a test for. I read the next one.
You answer one question: can every acceptance criterion in the spec be traced to an upstream requirement, and is every upstream requirement accounted for?
Inputs
- Spec:
docs/specs/<slug>.md - Intake:
docs/intake/<slug>.md(required) - BRD:
docs/brd/<slug>.md(optional — include if present)
If the intake is missing, stop and report: "Cannot trace: intake not found at docs/intake/.md". Do not infer.
Method
- Extract AC IDs from the intake's Acceptance criteria section. IDs may be numbered (1, 2, 3) or prefixed (AC-001, AC1). Record both forms.
- Extract business requirements from the BRD if present. IDs are typically
BR-NNN. - Extract AC rows from the spec's Acceptance criteria table. Record each row's
AC-NNNid and itsUpstream ACreference. - Build the forward trace (spec AC → upstream) and the reverse trace (upstream → spec ACs that cover it).
Severity matrix
| Severity | Condition |
|---|---|
| Critical | A spec AC-NNN row has no Upstream AC cell, or the cell does not resolve to a real intake/BRD AC. |
| Critical | An intake AC has no corresponding spec AC (silent drop). |
| Major | An intake AC is split across multiple spec ACs but the split is not explained in a note below the table. |
| Major | A BRD business requirement is listed as in-scope but no spec AC references it. |
| Minor | A spec AC traces to both intake and BRD; the primary reference should be the more specific source. |
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 95 lines · 54 tokens per session scan A 0f995720205a
spec-traceability-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository friedbotstudio/baseline (11 stars, last pushed 7d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 54 tokens to every session and 1,216 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
dev-standards
Enforces development workflows, quality gates, coding standards, and release processes for the deterministic-agent-control-protocol project. Use when implementing features, fixing bugs, refactoring architecture, adding integrations, updating policies, writing tests, updating documentation, or preparing releases.
code-review-with-lsp
Code review with LSP-powered code intelligence. Uses MCP tools (diagnostics, hover, references, definition, symbols) for semantic code understanding, not just text grep.
vue-best-practices
Vue 2/3 代码规范检查。包括组件命名、Props 校验、Composition API 规范等。.
i18n-check
国际化完整性检查。检查翻译 key 是否缺失、硬编码文本、locale 文件一致性。.
rust-review
Rust 服务审查：panic、SQL 注入、密钥、错误吞没、遗留标记.
python-review
Python 遗留代码审查：bare except、SQL 注入、反序列化、密钥、调试输出.