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 intent-driven-dev/intent-driven-template --skill gherkin-authoringgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/intent-driven-dev/intent-driven-templateWrote 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/intent-driven-dev/intent-driven-template/gherkin-authoring)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/intent-driven-dev/intent-driven-template/gherkin-authoring"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/intent-driven-dev/intent-driven-template/gherkin-authoring/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/intent-driven-dev/intent-driven-template/gherkin-authoring"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/intent-driven-dev/intent-driven-template/gherkin-authoring.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00054 | $0.01250 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.00500 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00250 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00125 |
Grade A, and why
gherkin-authoring 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 — 96 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Gherkin Authoring
Overview
Write Gherkin as executable examples of business behavior. Optimize for domain language, concrete examples, and observable outcomes; keep implementation and UI mechanics inside step definitions.
Scope
Use this for standalone .feature files and Gherkin embedded in Markdown or other prose. When Gherkin is inside a Markdown wrapper, review or rewrite only the Gherkin section unless the user asks for broader document edits. Preserve fences, headings, and surrounding prose. If the input includes Markdown around the Gherkin, return the Markdown wrapper with only the Gherkin block changed.
Workflow
- Identify the Gherkin region: whole
.featurefile, fencedgherkinblock, indented block, quoted acceptance criteria, or inline scenario text. - Preserve the surrounding wrapper unless explicitly asked to change it. For Markdown input, return the heading/prose/fence context, not just the fenced Gherkin block.
- Clarify the behavior as examples: initial state, event, observable outcome.
- Choose the smallest structure that expresses the behavior:
Feature, optionalRule,Background,Scenario/Example, orScenario OutlinewithExamples. - Keep scenarios concrete and short, usually 3-5 steps.
- Review syntax and readability before returning: colons, step keywords, duplicate step text, observable outcomes, and table/doc string formatting.
Quick Reference
| Construct | Use for | Syntax note |
|---|---|---|
Feature: |
One high-level capability per feature document or block | Requires : |
Rule: |
Group scenarios under one business rule | Requires : |
Scenario: / Example: |
One concrete example | Requires : |
Background: |
Short shared context for following scenarios | Requires :; one per Feature or Rule |
Scenario Outline: |
Same behavior with varied data | Requires Examples: and <parameter> placeholders |
Examples: |
Data rows for an outline | Requires : and a table |
Given |
Known state or precondition | No : |
When |
Event or action | No : |
Then |
Observable outcome | No : |
And / But |
Continue the previous step type | No : |
* |
Bullet-like step list | Use sparingly for list-style setup |
@tag |
Group or filter features/scenarios | Place above the item tagged |
# |
Line comment | Line comments only; no block comments |
""" |
Doc String | Passed as final step argument |
| ` | ` | Data Table |
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 · 96 lines · 54 tokens per session scan A 6be226f25e29
gherkin-authoring is a skill published in the GitHub repository intent-driven-dev/intent-driven-template (169 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 54 tokens to every session and 1,250 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
prompt-eval-builder
Domain knowledge for extracting eval assertions and generating test invocation prompts from command/agent specs. Used for building promptfoo evaluation configs.
test-generate
Generate and run tests [file].
spec-verify
Check that an OpenSpec change's implementation actually matches its spec, before anything is archived - artifact validity via openspec validate --strict, the repo's own verify gate run for real, and scenario-by-scenario conformance against the spec delta. Read-only: it reports, it never fixes. Use when the user says…
code-check
Fast code hygiene validation (lints, formatters, tests, coverage) for quick development loop feedback.
go-testing
Use when writing or fixing Go tests — table-driven cases, parallel safety, helpers, fakes, fuzzing, deterministic time (testing/synctest), goroutine leak detection (goleak), HTTP handlers. Apply proactively when a function gets a new test or a test is flaky. Benchmark methodology: see go-benchmark.
verification-before-completion
Use when about to claim work is complete, fixed, or passing, before committing or creating PRs - requires running verification commands and confirming output before making any success claims; evidence before assertions always.