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 Obsidian-Owl/specwright --skill sw-designgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Obsidian-Owl/specwrightWrote 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/obsidian-owl/specwright/sw-design)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/obsidian-owl/specwright/sw-design"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/obsidian-owl/specwright/sw-design/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/obsidian-owl/specwright/sw-design"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/obsidian-owl/specwright/sw-design.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 | $0.00029 | $0.02146 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00858 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00429 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00215 |
Grade A, and why
sw-design 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 — 166 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Specwright Design
Goal
Research the codebase, design a solution, challenge it adversarially, and produce
design artifacts. Output is a design — not specs, not code. Operates autonomously
between research and gate handoff, applying protocols/decision.md for all decisions.
Inputs
- The user's request (argument or conversation)
{projectArtifactsRoot}/CONSTITUTION.md-- practices to follow{projectArtifactsRoot}/CHARTER.md-- vision and invariants{projectArtifactsRoot}/config.json-- project configuration{worktreeStateRoot}/session.json-- current worktree attachment, when present{repoStateRoot}/work/*/workflow.json-- other active works for collision checks- The codebase itself
Outputs
When complete, runtime and auditable artifacts exist in both locations:
{repoStateRoot}/work/{id}/stage-report.md-- runtime-local design handoff digest with attention-required at the top{workArtifactsRoot}/{id}/design.md-- solution overview, approach, integration points, risk assessment- Required section:
## Blast Radiuslisting: modules/files the design touches, failure propagation scope for each (local/adjacent/systemic), and what the design does NOT change.
- Required section:
{workArtifactsRoot}/{id}/context.md-- research findings, file paths, gotchas (travels with downstream agents)- design assumptions artifact under
{workArtifactsRoot}/{id}/-- classified assumptions with resolution status {workArtifactsRoot}/{id}/decisions.md-- all autonomous decisions recorded perprotocols/decision.md
When warranted: data-model.md, contracts.md, testing-strategy.md, infra.md, migrations.md.
Constraints
Stage boundary (LOW freedom):
Follow protocols/stage-boundary.md. Produce design artifacts and research context.
NEVER write specs, decompose, implement, branch, or test. After gate handoff, STOP.
Ownership guard (LOW freedom):
- When the current worktree session is already attached to an existing work,
resolve live ownership from
session.json, not from branch names alone. - If another live top-level worktree owns that work, STOP and point the
operator to the explicit
/sw-adoptflow rather than mutating design artifacts here. /sw-adoptmay attach only the current worktree session.sw-designmust never rewrite another worktree'ssession.json.
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 · 166 lines · 29 tokens per session scan A 7992b1b799fd
sw-design is a skill published in the GitHub repository Obsidian-Owl/specwright (10 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 29 tokens to every session and 2,146 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
release
Cut a brooks-lint release: set the version in package.json, propagate it across all four plugin manifests and every version-bearing text file (README badges, docs site metadata), write the CHANGELOG entry, validate, then commit, push, tag, and publish the GitHub release. Triggers when the maintainer asks to "release"…
recipe-front-review
Reviews completed frontend implementation for governing-source compliance, scope economy, repository quality, and security, then applies user-approved React corrections.
new-skill
Scaffold a new brooks-lint analysis skill so it passes npm run validate and npm run evals on the first try — generates skills/{name}/SKILL.md (with the mandatory "Do NOT trigger for:" clause and a Process section citing guide step ranges) plus skills/{name}/{name}-guide.md (sequentially numbered steps), then appends…
brooks-audit
Architecture audit that maps module dependencies, checks layering integrity, and flags structural decay across a codebase, drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user asks to audit architecture, review folder/module structure, check for circular imports, understand how the codebase is organized…
brooks-sweep
Full-sweep mode: runs a unified analysis across all quality dimensions — code decay, architecture, tech debt, and test quality — then applies fixes directly to the codebase. Safe changes are auto-applied; risky changes are confirmed before execution. Drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user…
brooks-test
Test quality review drawing on twelve classic engineering books — with primary focus on xUnit Test Patterns, The Art of Unit Testing, How Google Tests Software, and Working Effectively with Legacy Code — that diagnoses structural problems in an existing test suite: brittleness, mock abuse, coverage illusions, slow…