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 agentmods add skills/phuonghx/aim-cli/spec-driven-developmentnpx skills add phuonghx/aim-cli --skill spec-driven-developmentgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/phuonghx/aim-cliWhat 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 | $0.00098 | $0.01289 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00049 | $0.00645 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00020 | $0.00258 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00129 |
Grade A, and why
spec-driven-development 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 yesterday.
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 — 119 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Spec-Driven Development
Agree on what and how before writing a single line of code.
Inspired by GitHub spec-kit and AWS Kiro: capture intent in three living documents, gate each on approval, and let the spec — not memory — be the source of truth the agent codes against.
When to write a spec (vs. skip it)
| Write a spec | Skip it |
|---|---|
| New feature or capability | One-line / typo fix |
| Touches 3+ files or modules | Single obvious change |
| Requirements are fuzzy or contested | Behavior is fully clear |
| Cross-cutting (auth, data model, API) | Local refactor with tests already green |
| You'd struggle to write a test for it | You can already name the assertion |
Rule of thumb: if you can't state the acceptance test in one sentence, you need a spec.
The three artifacts
Each is one file. Keep them short and current; stale specs are worse than none.
requirements.md— WHAT & WHY. Problem statement, user stories (As a <role>, I want <capability>, so that <benefit>), and numbered requirements R1, R2… Each requirement carries EARS acceptance criteria (see theears-acceptance-criteriaskill). No solution detail here.design.md— HOW. Architecture, components, data model, and the trade-offs / alternatives considered. Reference requirements by id (R1, R2) so coverage is traceable. Name the risks and open questions.tasks.md— STEPS. Dependency-ordered, checkable task list derived from the design. Mark independent items[P](parallel). Every task should map back to a requirement and be independently verifiable.
The left-to-right approval gate
requirements.md ──approve──▶ design.md ──approve──▶ tasks.md ──approve──▶ CODE
WHAT HOW STEPS implement
- Do not move right until the current artifact is approved. No design before requirements are agreed; no code before design is approved.
- New information flows left: a discovery while coding updates
tasks.md, and if it changes intent, bumpdesign.md/requirements.mdand re-confirm. - The gate is a checkpoint, not a contract — keep each pass lightweight.
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.
- yesterday First seen · 119 lines · 98 tokens per session scan A abcd98b6a646
spec-driven-development is a skill published in the GitHub repository phuonghx/aim-cli (1 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 98 tokens to every session and 1,289 once invoked, about $0.0005 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
hs-release
Cut a core Hindsight release (vX.Y.Z) and open the changelog + blog PR. Use when asked to cut/start a release, bump the version, or publish a new Hindsight version.
hindsight-local
Store user preferences, learnings from tasks, and procedure outcomes. Use to remember what works and recall context before new tasks. (user).
research-repository
Build a repository that makes findings findable, reusable, and cumulative across teams. Use when the same research keeps getting redone. For synthesising one study, use affinity-diagram.
design-negotiation
Advocate for design quality, scope, and timeline with partners and leadership using evidence and shared goals. Use in the conversation itself. For the commercial vocabulary behind it, use business-design (ux-strategy).
user-persona
Build research-grounded personas with goals, frustrations, and behavioural patterns. Use when decisions need a consistent user reference. For one session's emotional snapshot use empathy-map; for motivation framing use jobs-to-be-done.
version-control-strategy
Define version control for design files, components, and libraries — branching, naming, and release. Use when file history is chaotic. For design system contribution rules, use design-system-governance (design-systems).