Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to markmhendrickson/ateles. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/markmhendrickson/ateles/main/.claude/skills/run-feature-workflow/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/markmhendrickson/atelesWrote 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/markmhendrickson/ateles/run-feature-workflow)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/markmhendrickson/ateles/run-feature-workflow"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/markmhendrickson/ateles/run-feature-workflow.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 5.1 | $0.00012 | $0.00727 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00364 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00145 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00073 |
Grade A, and why
run-feature-workflow 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.
This is a copy
92% identical to run-feature-workflow — 10 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 81 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Run Feature Workflow
feature_id = {{input:feature_id}}
Configuration is read from foundation-config.yaml.
-
Load configuration:
- Read
foundation-config.yamlto get feature unit settings - Determine directory structure, manifest complexity, testing requirements
- Read
-
Read authoritative documents:
foundation/development/feature_unit_workflow.md(workflow context){configured_directory}/in_progress/{{input:feature_id}}/{{input:feature_id}}_spec.md(orcompleted/if completed){configured_directory}/in_progress/{{input:feature_id}}/manifest.yaml(orcompleted/if completed)foundation/development/templates/feature_unit_spec_template.md- Repository-specific execution instructions (if they exist)
- Repository-specific architecture/module documentation (based on spec)
-
Determine risk level:
- low → skip plan
- medium → produce brief structured plan
- high/critical → produce detailed plan and wait for user approval
-
Apply Feature Unit execution principles:
- Update spec/manifest if ambiguous
- Update code/tests/docs together
- Follow architectural invariants (from repo-specific docs)
- Preserve accessibility and i18n rules (if applicable)
-
Run tests (based on configuration):
- Unit tests (if
testing.require_unit_tests: true) - Integration tests (if
testing.require_integration_tests: true) - E2E tests (if
testing.require_e2e_tests: true) - Verify coverage meets configured targets
If any tests fail:
- Immediately invoke
Fix Feature Bugwith feature_id={{input:feature_id}} - Do NOT attempt to fix bugs inline
- Let the error protocol classify and correct
- After bugfix completes, re-run the test suite
- Only proceed to step 6 once all tests pass
- Unit tests (if
-
Apply error protocol (if repository has one) only if bugs were encountered and fixed via step 5.
-
Spec-to-Implementation Diff Checkpoint (CRITICAL):
Before producing the final summary:
- Compare the implemented code against the spec
- List any ways implementation intentionally diverged from spec (even if small)
- For each divergence:
- Either update the spec to reflect the change (if divergence is intentional and correct)
- Or mark the divergence as a bug to be fixed (if divergence is unintentional)
- Present this diff to the user:
- "Implementation vs Spec Diff: [list of divergences]"
- "For each divergence, should I update the spec or fix the implementation? (spec/implementation/list)"
- Do NOT proceed to final summary until spec and implementation are aligned (either by updating spec or fixing implementation)
-
Produce a final change summary:
- feature_id
- files changed
- risk
- error_class (if bugfix)
- tests run
- coverage achieved
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 · 81 lines · 12 tokens per session scan A 42441fe2157c
run-feature-workflow is a skill published in the GitHub repository markmhendrickson/ateles (6 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 12 tokens to every session and 727 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 92% identical to run-feature-workflow, differing in 10 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
qa-release-gate
Act as the final quality gate before a release, with explicit go/no-go criteria.
cro
Conversion audit for funnels and pages — a section-by-section friction log (clarity, anxiety, distraction, motivation), heuristic checks (message match, above-the-fold value prop, form cost), an ICE-scored hypothesis backlog, and top-3 A/B test designs with success metrics and minimum-sample notes. Use when the user…
tasks
A task-breakdown tool that turns a plan, specification, feature brief, bug report, technical-debt item, or chore into small TASK-NNN work items. Technical debt means postponed cleanup or design work in a codebase.
check-work
Check your work with a verification subagent that reviews diffs, runs builds and tests, and evaluates correctness. Read this file for instructions. Use when asked to "check work", "verify changes", "self-verify", "/check-work", "/check", "/verify", or "/self-verify".
continue
Autonomous work — find and execute ready tasks.
prd
A Product Requirements Document (PRD) writer for large software initiatives. A PRD records the problem, goals, requirements, assumptions, and evidence before implementation begins.