Better Harness is an open-source platform for studying and improving how coding agents work on tasks, using written harnesses, controlled tests, and evidence from projects and sessions. Coding teams use it to identify workflow problems and turn them into prioritized improvements and verifiable next steps. Its catalogue entries extend coding-agent workflows for supported hosts such as Claude Code, Codex, Cursor, and others.
Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to QoderAI/better-harness. 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/QoderAI/better-harness/main/.agents/skills/triangulate-spec-review/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/QoderAI/better-harnessWrote 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/qoderai/better-harness/triangulate-spec-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/qoderai/better-harness/triangulate-spec-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/qoderai/better-harness/triangulate-spec-review.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00070 | $0.00559 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00035 | $0.00280 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00112 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00056 |
Grade A, and why
triangulate-spec-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 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 48 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Triangulate Spec Review
Use independent AI reviewers as an evaluation surface for specs. The lead agent owns synthesis, edits, validation, and the final recommendation.
Workflow
- Resolve the target spec path and the acceptance gate. If the user did not
name dimensions, default to
complexity,convenience, andevolution. - Read the target spec and nearby repo instructions. Do not pass your suspected fixes or conclusions to reviewers.
- Use the same read-only prompt for every reviewer. Ask for structured
P1/P2/P3findings and ap1_p2_clearboolean. - Run at least two reviewers; prefer three when available. Use
scripts/run-triad-review.mjsfor repeatable local runs. - Normalize findings. Treat reviewers as evidence, not authority:
fix convergent
P1/P2issues first, challenge weak or contradictory findings, and leaveP3as backlog unless it is cheap and clarifying. - If the user asked for edits, patch only the owning spec or directly related helper docs. Keep unrelated refactors out of the review loop.
- Run local validation such as
git diff --check, relevant tests, and targetedrgchecks for renamed concepts or stale paths. - Repeat the reviewer pass until every requested reviewer reports no
P1orP2, or until the user stops the loop.
Resources
- Read
references/review-loop.mdfor the prompt contract, severity rubric, command matrix, and iteration patterns. - Run this skill's
scripts/run-triad-review.mjs --target <path>script, resolved relative to thetriangulate-spec-reviewskill directory, to execute a read-only review round and write normalized JSON output.
Guardrails
- Pass raw artifacts and task-local context to reviewers, not intended answers.
- Keep every reviewer prompt materially identical unless a tool requires command syntax changes.
- Do not let reviewers edit files. The lead agent applies changes after comparing findings.
- Do not declare acceptance from an average score. Acceptance requires no
P1/P2findings from the required review surface.
What ships with it
2 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 9d ago First seen · 48 lines · 70 tokens per session scan A 15f69c0d9fd4
triangulate-spec-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository QoderAI/better-harness (2,180 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 70 tokens to every session and 559 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
sdd-tasks
Break an SDD change into implementation tasks. Trigger: orchestrator launches task planning for a change.
comet-verify
Comet Phase 4: Verify and Close. Invoke with /comet-verify. Verify implementation matches design, handle development branch.
go-testing
Trigger: Go tests, go test coverage, Bubbletea teatest, golden files. Apply focused Go testing patterns.
pr-blocker-summarizer
Summarizes open pull requests into a blockers-first standup digest. Activates when the user asks to summarize open PRs, find blocked pull requests, generate a PR standup, or triage review backlog from a PR export.
review-work
Post-implementation gate review: run manual QA on the real surface yourself, then launch ONE gate reviewer (never a panel) to audit goal, constraints, code quality, security, missed context, and QA evidence. Use before a PR handoff or when the user explicitly asks to review completed work.
ijfw-cross-audit
Generate a cross-platform multi-model audit (Trident) on a diff, brief, or artifact. Trigger: 'cross audit', 'Trident', 'second opinion', 'check with other models', 'check with other AIs', 'cross-check this', 'get another perspective', /cross-audit.