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 pe-menezes/vibeflow --skill vibeflow-gen-specgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/pe-menezes/vibeflowWrote 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/pe-menezes/vibeflow/vibeflow-gen-spec)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/pe-menezes/vibeflow/vibeflow-gen-spec"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/pe-menezes/vibeflow/vibeflow-gen-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/pe-menezes/vibeflow/vibeflow-gen-spec"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/pe-menezes/vibeflow/vibeflow-gen-spec.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 | $0.00067 | $0.02122 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00027 | $0.00849 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00424 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00212 |
Grade A, and why
vibeflow-gen-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 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 — 165 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Vibeflow: Gen-Spec
Generate a spec for a feature or task. Includes objective, DoD,
scope, anti-scope, technical decisions, and risks. Grounded in
the project's real patterns from .vibeflow/.
Usage: Provide the feature description or path to a PRD file as input.
Language
Detect the language of the user's input.
Write ALL output in that same language.
Technical terms in English are acceptable regardless of the detected language.
A few literals are exempt and stay in English in any output language, because
other commands match them byte for byte: the ## References and
## Clarifications headings, the Scenarios: and Risk code: labels, the
[NEEDS CLARIFICATION: …] marker, and the EARS keywords WHEN and
THE SYSTEM SHALL.
Before writing the spec
-
Read the input. A path to a
.mdinside.vibeflow/prds/is a PRD: problem, audience, solution, scope, and anti-scope are already settled — your job is translating them into technical decisions, binary DoD checks, and applicable patterns. Anything else is a feature description. When the PRD has a## Clarificationssection, carry its entries into the spec's own## Clarifications, so the answers travel with the contract. -
Load context from
.vibeflow/, if it exists:index.md— project context. ItsSuggested budget: ≤ Nline is this spec's budget; without it, ≤6 files.conventions.md— the project's standards.- Patterns: read the
## Pattern Registryblock inindex.md(between<!-- vibeflow:patterns:start/end -->markers), cross-reference its tags and modules against the feature, and load the top 3–5 matches. With no registry, fall back to reading all pattern docs.
No
.vibeflow/→ warn that results improve after the vibeflow-analyze skill, then read the relevant code directly. -
Identify what exists today for this feature and which patterns apply to it.
-
Collect what the input points at — test files, mockups, code to port, the URL of a reference implementation — and what each one is for. A reference in code pins the target behavior better than a paragraph describing it.
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 · +53 lines 7ba575c34cc5
- 1mo ago First seen · 112 lines · 67 tokens per session scan A 8d81d93104cb
vibeflow-gen-spec is a skill published in the GitHub repository pe-menezes/vibeflow (32 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 67 tokens to every session and 2,122 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
code-review-csharp
Perform structured code reviews of C# source code covering naming conventions, performance, security, readability, and .NET best practices. Trigger phrases include "review this C# code", "check my C# for best practices", "analyze this C# class", "find issues in my C# code".
megalinter-check
Collect MegaLinter lint errors for the current repository. Use when the user wants to know if the code passes linting, why the MegaLinter CI job fails, or before/after fixing lint errors. Two modes - watch a CI job (GitHub Actions, GitLab CI, Azure Pipelines, Bitbucket Pipelines) and parse its logs, or run MegaLinter…
assistant
Assistant — on any repo, scan README→docs→AGENTS→CONTRIBUTING→PR templates→task runners→devcontainer→CI→configs before code; cite sources; prefer AGENTS.md for agent behavior; portable across Cursor/Copilot/Claude; use agent-toolkit CLI when needed.
design-improvement
WHAT - Browser-grounded iterative design improvement. Consumes design-assessment findings, defines direction, prioritizes safe vs ambiguous changes, implements within existing design system, runs app, captures rendered evidence via browser, reviews and iterates. Reuses evidence model — no new scoring framework.
confluence-permission
Manage space and page permissions and restrictions. ALWAYS use when user wants to control access, set restrictions, or manage who can view/edit content.
review
WCAG 2.2 AA curated accessibility review — distinguishes automatically detectable, browser-assisted, and manual/human-judgment findings with evidence citations and SC mapping. Composes with design-assessment/design-improvement/frontend-design-review.