Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to mrclrchtr/supi. 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/mrclrchtr/supi/main/.agents/skills/to-spec/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mrclrchtr/supiWrote 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/mrclrchtr/supi/to-spec)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/mrclrchtr/supi/to-spec"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mrclrchtr/supi/to-spec/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/mrclrchtr/supi/to-spec"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mrclrchtr/supi/to-spec.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" 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 | $0.00030 | $0.00632 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00253 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00126 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00063 |
Grade A, and why
to-spec 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 7d 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
95% identical to to-spec — 0 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 — 76 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
This skill takes the current conversation context and codebase understanding and produces a spec. Do NOT interview the user; just synthesize what you already know.
The issue tracker and triage label vocabulary should have been provided to you. If not, tell the user to run /setup-matt-pocock-skills.
Process
-
Explore the repo to understand the current state of the codebase, if you haven't already. Use the project's domain glossary vocabulary throughout the spec, and respect any ADRs in the area you're touching.
-
Sketch out the seams at which you're going to test the feature. Existing seams should be preferred to new ones. Use the highest seam possible. If new seams are needed, propose them at the highest point you can. The fewer seams across the codebase, the better - the ideal number is one.
Check with the user that these seams match their expectations.
- Write the spec using the template below, then publish it to the project issue tracker. Apply the
ready-for-agenttriage label - no need for additional triage.
Problem Statement
The problem that the user is facing, from the user's perspective.
Solution
The solution to the problem, from the user's perspective.
User Stories
A LONG, numbered list of user stories. Each user story should be in the format of:
- As an , I want a , so that
This list of user stories should be extremely extensive and cover all aspects of the feature.
Implementation Decisions
A list of implementation decisions that were made. This can include:
- The modules that will be built/modified
- The interfaces of those modules that will be modified
- Technical clarifications from the developer
- Architectural decisions
- Schema changes
- API contracts
- Specific interactions
Do NOT include specific file paths or code snippets. They may end up being outdated very quickly.
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.
- 7d ago Changed 43ad9cf318e5
- 2mo ago First seen · 76 lines · 30 tokens per session scan A 5d26479544b0
to-spec is a skill published in the GitHub repository mrclrchtr/supi (103 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 30 tokens to every session and 632 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 95% identical to to-spec, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
muse-delegate
Delegate a coding task to Muse Code (muse) as a background implementer, then review its diff and land it yourself. Use this whenever the user wants to hand implementation work to Muse — phrasings like "have Muse do X", "delegate this to Muse", "run it through Muse", or "use Muse to implement/fix/refactor" — or wants…
pi-parity-review
Adversarially verify that a ported change is faithful to the original pi implementation (TS source + published npm build). Use after porting upstream pi changes, or standalone on any area of this repo ("is X faithful to pi?").
pi-go-review
Review ported Go code for idiomatic quality — that the port maximizes Go rather than transliterating TypeScript. Use after porting upstream pi changes, or standalone on any diff in this repo.
gh-address-comments
Help address review/issue comments on the open GitHub PR for the current branch using gh CLI; verify gh auth first and prompt the user to authenticate if not logged in.
review
Review a change for correctness, security, and missing tests.
review-pr
Deeply review a GitHub pull request.