Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to nawodyaishan/universal-mcp-sync. 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/nawodyaishan/universal-mcp-sync/main/.gemini/skills/agentic-sdd-architecture-review/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/nawodyaishan/universal-mcp-syncWrote 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/nawodyaishan/universal-mcp-sync/agentic-sdd-architecture-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/nawodyaishan/universal-mcp-sync/agentic-sdd-architecture-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/nawodyaishan/universal-mcp-sync/agentic-sdd-architecture-review/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/nawodyaishan/universal-mcp-sync/agentic-sdd-architecture-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/nawodyaishan/universal-mcp-sync/agentic-sdd-architecture-review.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 | $0.00031 | $0.00542 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00271 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00108 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00054 |
Grade A, and why
agentic-sdd-architecture-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 12d 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 — 87 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Agentic SDD Architecture Review
Use this skill as the mandatory gate between technical planning and task generation or code.
Goal
Review the plan as a production architecture gate. Do not implement code.
Required Packet
Review:
specs/<feature>/spec.mdspecs/<feature>/clarify.md, if presentspecs/<feature>/plan.mdspecs/<feature>/data-model.md, if presentspecs/<feature>/contracts/, if presentspecs/<feature>/test-plan.md, if present.specify/memory/constitution.md- relevant ADRs
- dependency-change notes
- rollback notes
Checklist
Assess:
- scope is clear
- open questions are resolved or explicitly deferred
- plan follows existing architecture
- new abstractions are justified
- existing libraries/framework features are used before custom layers
- dependencies are justified and approved
- data ownership is clear
- migrations and rollback are documented
- sensitive data and retention rules are considered
- API compatibility and error responses are defined
- auth and authorization boundaries are explicit
- input validation and injection risks are considered
- observability and failure modes are defined
- deployment and rollback impact are understood
- tests cover the core risks
Decision
Return one of:
Approved: task breakdown may begin.Needs changes: list blocking changes before approval.Rejected: the plan is structurally unsafe or inconsistent with goals.
Writing Review Artifacts
Create or update specs/<feature>/review.md with:
- reviewed artifacts
- findings by severity
- approval status
- required changes
- optional improvements
- reviewer and date placeholders
If the plan is approved, update the approval status in plan.md only if the user explicitly asked you to maintain artifacts.
Stop Conditions
Do not approve when:
- a high-risk area lacks explicit human approval
- rollback is missing for migrations or operational risk
- dependencies are unjustified
- tests are absent for behavior, security, or data boundaries
- plan contradicts constitution or ADRs
- code generation would require guessing
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.
- 12d ago First seen · 87 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A 7fb39d1c6ea4
agentic-sdd-architecture-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository nawodyaishan/universal-mcp-sync (6 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 542 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
find-simplifications
Use for a periodic repo-wide sweep of qwen-code for accumulated excess surface — dead components and files, orphaned locale keys, exports nothing consumes, added-then-removed scaffolding — filing candidates on a tracking issue and landing only what a maintainer has said yes to. Repo-wide and evidence-first; every…
swarm-pr-review
Run a graph-guided, tool-augmented PR review using context packing, parallel exploration, mandatory repository-agnostic risk-family coverage with dispatch scaled to diff size and risk, independent reviewer validation, critic challenge, and metrics writeback. Use for deep pull request review with low false-positive…
review
Validate plans, execution, or PRs against wish criteria — returns SHIP / FIX-FIRST / BLOCKED with severity-tagged gaps.
include-test-files-that-assert-on-behavior-being-changed-in-decl
When delegating a task affected by this skill, include.
review
Adversarial fresh-context review of an increment before it ships. Every finding cites path:line and is re-verified. Use when saying "review", "grill this", or "critique the implementation".
tech-debt-ci-review
Codex adapter for deep technical-debt and CI-stability audits. Use when asked to find test theater, flaky tests, missing or mis-scoped tests, brittle CI/toolchain behavior, structural debt blocking green PRs, or a remediation order for opencode-swarm.