beads-viz: Skill for Claude Code

.claude/skills/openspec-verify-change/SKILL.md

openspec-verify-change is a skill for Claude Code from pyros-projects/beads-viz. It costs 32 tokens per session (1,441 once invoked), scanned A, a copy of openspec-verify-change, MIT.

A review step for an OpenSpec change, where the written proposal, specifications, design, and task list are compared with the implementation. OpenSpec is a workflow for planning and tracking code changes.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to select an OpenSpec change and verify its task status and supporting documents against the code.
Why use it?
It helps find unfinished, incorrect, or inconsistent work before a change is archived. It also avoids checking the wrong change when several are active.

Skill for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: installed under .claude/. Also seen: names the AskUserQuestion tool.

This is pyros-projects/beads-viz's own configuration. It tells Claude Code how to work on beads-viz itself, so it is not a mod to install elsewhere. Copy it as a starting point and replace the rules that are about this project. Everything beads-viz configures →

Reuse

Borrowing it

Nothing to install: this file belongs to pyros-projects/beads-viz. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.

Copy the file
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/pyros-projects/beads-viz/main/.claude/skills/openspec-verify-change/SKILL.md
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/pyros-projects/beads-viz

Made for: Claude Code.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for openspec-verify-change

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/pyros-projects/beads-viz/openspec-verify-change/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/pyros-projects/beads-viz/openspec-verify-change)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/pyros-projects/beads-viz/openspec-verify-change"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/pyros-projects/beads-viz/openspec-verify-change/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for openspec-verify-change

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/pyros-projects/beads-viz/openspec-verify-change"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/pyros-projects/beads-viz/openspec-verify-change.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 32 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,441 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin 75% copy Near-identical to another mod in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00032 $0.01441
Opus 5 $0.00016 $0.00720
Sonnet 5 $0.00006 $0.00288
Haiku 4.5 $0.00003 $0.00144

Measured 9d ago against content hash 94c988710e2a, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-09, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

openspec-verify-change 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 9d 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.

Origin

This is a copy

75% identical to openspec-verify-change — 28 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.

.claude/skills/openspec-verify-change/SKILL.md · 169 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 169 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Verify that an implementation matches the change artifacts (specs, tasks, design).

Input: Optionally specify a change name. If omitted, check if it can be inferred from conversation context. If vague or ambiguous you MUST prompt for available changes.

Steps

  1. If no change name provided, prompt for selection

    Run openspec list --json to get available changes. Use the AskUserQuestion tool to let the user select.

    Show changes that have implementation tasks (tasks artifact exists). Include the schema used for each change if available. Mark changes with incomplete tasks as "(In Progress)".

    IMPORTANT: Do NOT guess or auto-select a change. Always let the user choose.

  2. Check status to understand the schema

    openspec status --change "<name>" --json
    

    Parse the JSON to understand:

    • schemaName: The workflow being used (e.g., "spec-driven")
    • Which artifacts exist for this change
  3. Get the change directory and load artifacts

    openspec instructions apply --change "<name>" --json
    

    This returns the change directory and context files. Read all available artifacts from contextFiles.

  4. Initialize verification report structure

    Create a report structure with three dimensions:

    • Completeness: Track tasks and spec coverage
    • Correctness: Track requirement implementation and scenario coverage
    • Coherence: Track design adherence and pattern consistency

    Each dimension can have CRITICAL, WARNING, or SUGGESTION issues.

  5. Verify Completeness

    Task Completion:

    • If tasks.md exists in contextFiles, read it
    • Parse checkboxes: - [ ] (incomplete) vs - [x] (complete)
    • Count complete vs total tasks
    • If incomplete tasks exist:
      • Add CRITICAL issue for each incomplete task
      • Recommendation: "Complete task: " or "Mark as done if already implemented"

    Spec Coverage:

    • If delta specs exist in openspec/changes/<name>/specs/:
      • Extract all requirements (marked with "### Requirement:")
      • For each requirement:
        • Search codebase for keywords related to the requirement
        • Assess if implementation likely exists
      • If requirements appear unimplemented:
        • Add CRITICAL issue: "Requirement not found: "
        • Recommendation: "Implement requirement X: "
  6. Verify Correctness

    Requirement Implementation Mapping:

    • For each requirement from delta specs:
      • Search codebase for implementation evidence
      • If found, note file paths and line ranges
      • Assess if implementation matches requirement intent
      • If divergence detected:
        • Add WARNING: "Implementation may diverge from spec: "
        • Recommendation: "Review : against requirement X"

    Scenario Coverage:

    • For each scenario in delta specs (marked with "#### Scenario:"):
      • Check if conditions are handled in code
      • Check if tests exist covering the scenario
      • If scenario appears uncovered:
        • Add WARNING: "Scenario not covered: "
        • Recommendation: "Add test or implementation for scenario: "
  7. Verify Coherence

    Design Adherence:

    • If design.md exists in contextFiles:
      • Extract key decisions (look for sections like "Decision:", "Approach:", "Architecture:")
      • Verify implementation follows those decisions
      • If contradiction detected:
        • Add WARNING: "Design decision not followed: "
        • Recommendation: "Update implementation or revise design.md to match reality"
    • If no design.md: Skip design adherence check, note "No design.md to verify against"

    Code Pattern Consistency:

    • Review new code for consistency with project patterns
    • Check file naming, directory structure, coding style
    • If significant deviations found:
      • Add SUGGESTION: "Code pattern deviation: "
      • Recommendation: "Consider following project pattern: "

Read the full file on GitHub · 169 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 9d ago First seen · 169 lines · 32 tokens per session scan A 94c988710e2a

Subscribe to this mod's changes

openspec-verify-change is a skill published in the GitHub repository pyros-projects/beads-viz (1 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 32 tokens to every session and 1,441 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 75% identical to openspec-verify-change, differing in 28 lines, and is treated as a copy.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

live-audit

Audit steam-games-mcp — build/test/lint gate, live MCP tool edge-case sweep (input validation, SteamID64/vanity/appid edge cases, key-gating), and source-level code review. Use when asked to test/audit the published or just-fixed steam-games-mcp package, hunt for bugs/edge cases, or repeat "the same kind of testing as…

Grinv/steam-games-mcp · 83 tokens

tool-description-check

Self-check a new or edited MCP tool description/field .describe() text before committing — verify every behavioral claim against live testing or source, check for contradictions with sibling tools, and score against Glama's Tool Definition Quality Score (TDQS) rubric. Use whenever a tool description or schema field…

Grinv/steam-games-mcp · 76 tokens

gitnexus-pr-review

Use when the user wants to review a pull request, understand what a PR changes, assess risk of merging, or check for missing test coverage. Examples: "Review this PR", "What does PR #42 change?", "Is this PR safe to merge?".

VKirill/agent-consult · 58 tokens

gitnexus-impact-analysis

Use when the user wants to know what will break if they change something, or needs safety analysis before editing code. Examples: "Is it safe to change X?", "What depends on this?", "What will break?".

VKirill/agent-consult · 50 tokens

gitnexus-refactoring

Use when the user wants to rename, extract, split, move, or restructure code safely. Examples: "Rename this function", "Extract this into a module", "Refactor this class", "Move this to a separate file".

VKirill/agent-consult · 53 tokens

liveagent-code-review

Review an open GitHub pull request or the current local branch and working tree with parallel, independent reviewers and evidence-based validation. Use when the user asks for code review, invokes the Code Review action from Git Review, or explicitly mentions this skill.

Stack-Cairn/LiveAgent · 54 tokens