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 martinffx/atelier --skill spec-finishgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/martinffx/atelierWrote 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/martinffx/atelier/spec-finish)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/martinffx/atelier/spec-finish"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/martinffx/atelier/spec-finish/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/martinffx/atelier/spec-finish"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/martinffx/atelier/spec-finish.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 | $0.00073 | $0.01027 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00029 | $0.00411 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00205 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00103 |
Grade A, and why
spec-finish 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 5d 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 — 168 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Spec Finish
Post-implementation workflow: simplify → synchronize docs → validate → review → prepare PR.
Prerequisites
Before starting, verify:
- All Spec-backed Plan tasks are complete
- Working directory has no unresolved staged or unstaged changes
- Tests pass
If not complete, go back to spec-implement.
Step 1: Compare Scope and Simplify
Compare the implementation with the original behavior and user goal before documentation or validation. Remove unrequested scope, duplicate concepts, one-consumer abstractions, and custom machinery that replaces sufficient platform behavior.
If the implementation faithfully follows an unnecessarily large design, stop and return to
spec-plan. Get approval for the smaller plan before continuing.
Update the finished SDD to describe the smaller result. Replace rejected architecture in the normative design and plan instead of preserving it as precedent; mention it only as a rejected alternative when that history remains useful.
Step 2: Update Documentation
Check whether README, API documentation, or changelog updates are needed. Make and commit any necessary documentation changes through code-commit before final validation.
Step 3: Validate
Run validation checks.
Test Suite
npm test
# or
pytest
# or
cargo test
Type Check
npm run typecheck
# or
python -m mypy
# or
cargo check
Lint
npm run lint
# or
ruff check .
# or
cargo clippy
Build
npm run build
# or
go build ./...
If any fail: Return to spec-implement to fix.
If all pass: Proceed.
Step 4: Review
Invoke the installed code-review skill through the harness's skill mechanism for one comprehensive review of the final change.
What to Review
- All changed files since the intended base branch's merge base
- Test coverage
- Documentation updates
- No debug code left
If code-review finds issues
- Minor fixes may be made here, then re-validated and reviewed.
- Findings with
blocking: trueorrequires_user_approval, and scope-changing fixes, return tospec-implement. Non-blocking findings and follow-ups do not.
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.
- 5d ago Changed · +1 lines aaeae599b38b
- 1mo ago First seen · 167 lines · 73 tokens per session scan A a6bd8f7d634d
spec-finish is a skill published in the GitHub repository martinffx/atelier (48 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 73 tokens to every session and 1,027 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
address-pr-feedback
Unified PR feedback workflow - collect, triage, and fix review comments in a single command.
pr
Draft a PR body from OMC's paper trail — the smallest visual that proves the change, evidence consumed from the verify protocol (never re-collected), reversibility from the ADR test on the diff, glossary language throughout.
guardian
Gatekeeping Git/PR by classifying change essence and recommending granularity, naming, and strategy; the ship recipe also executes PR delivery (create, CI watch, merge, cleanup) with Ask First on merge. Use when PR preparation, commit strategy, or gated PR delivery is needed.
validate-changes
Evaluate staged changes using LLM-as-a-Judge before committing.
signing-preflight
Before the first commit of a session, check that commit signing will work — the key is loaded and unlocked — and ask the operator to unlock it once, up front, instead of discovering it after a hundred unsigned commits. Never disables signing silently, never re-signs history without asking. Use at the start of…
ase-repo-review
Perform a holistic, human-reviewer-style critique of the currently staged Git changes (or, with --unstaged, of the unstaged and untracked changes, with --branch, of a branch against its base, or, with --commit, of a single commit) and emit an approve/reject verdict with prioritized, severity-tagged, line-cited…