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/qte77/claude-code-plugins/generating-tech-specnpx skills add qte77/claude-code-plugins --skill generating-tech-specgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/qte77/claude-code-pluginsWhat 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 | $0.00044 | $0.00719 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00022 | $0.00360 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00144 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00072 |
Grade A, and why
generating-tech-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 2d 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 — 63 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Technical Specification Generation
Target: $ARGUMENTS
Generate a structured technical specification document based on the requested type and topic.
References (MUST READ)
Read these before proceeding:
references/tech-spec-formats.md— ADR (MADR), RFC, design doc, and proposal templates
Spec Types
| Type | Trigger phrases | Output directory |
|---|---|---|
| ADR | "adr", "architectural decision record" | docs/adr/ |
| RFC | "rfc", "request for comments" | docs/rfc/ |
| Design Doc | "design doc", "design document", "tech spec" | docs/specs/ |
| Proposal | "proposal", "technical proposal" | docs/specs/ |
Workflow
- Detect spec type from arguments — default to Design Doc if ambiguous
- Read reference for the matching template format
- Glob for existing specs in the target directory to determine next sequence number:
- ADR:
docs/adr/NNNN-*.md(four-digit, e.g.,0001-use-postgres.md) - RFC:
docs/rfc/NNNN-*.md - Design Doc/Proposal:
docs/specs/<date>-<slug>.md
- ADR:
- WebSearch for relevant context if the topic references specific technologies
- Generate the document using the appropriate template structure
- Output location and suggest next steps (review, share, link to implementation)
Output Naming
ADR: docs/adr/NNNN-<slug>.md (e.g., 0003-use-event-sourcing.md)
RFC: docs/rfc/NNNN-<slug>.md (e.g., 0001-api-versioning.md)
Design: docs/specs/<date>-<slug>.md (e.g., 2026-03-01-auth-redesign.md)
Proposal: docs/specs/<date>-<slug>.md (e.g., 2026-03-01-migrate-to-k8s.md)
Rules
- Always read existing specs first to match formatting and numbering conventions
- Include YAML frontmatter with title, date, status, and author fields
- ADRs must follow MADR format (Context → Decision → Consequences)
- RFCs must include a "Status" field (Draft → Proposed → Accepted/Rejected)
- Never overwrite existing spec files — always create new ones
- Use
converting-doc-formatskill for PDF/HTML/DOCX export
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- 2d ago First seen · 63 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 1ce1958efa1e
generating-tech-spec is a skill published in the GitHub repository qte77/claude-code-plugins (2 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 44 tokens to every session and 719 once invoked, about $0.0002 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
orchestrator
FULLY AUTONOMOUS Flutter development pipeline orchestrator. Smart routing: PM analyzes -> creates targeted tasks -> Orchestrator executes only needed agents. Supports Asana task URLs. Includes QE verification via Maestro E2E tests. 7-phase flow: PM -> TodoWrite -> Execute -> Review -> Tests -> QE E2E -> Close.
flutter-guide
Flutter/BLoC Clean Architecture patterns, review checklists, and testing guides. Background knowledge for flutter-dev, flutter-reviewer, flutter-tester. Not user-invocable.
maestro-flutter
Maestro E2E testing knowledge for Flutter apps. YAML-based flows, TestKeys, visual regression, Maestro MCP integration. Background knowledge for QE E2E testing phase.
android-kotlin-compose
Android development with Kotlin and Jetpack Compose. Use when user mentions "Compose", "Jetpack Compose", "Material3", "Hilt", "Room", "ViewModel", or needs to build Android UI, implement MVVM architecture, manage Compose state, or integrate Jetpack libraries (Navigation, Room, Hilt, ViewModel). Triggers on…
android-kotlin-coroutines
Android development with Kotlin Coroutines and Flow. Use when user mentions "coroutines", "suspend", "Flow", "StateFlow", "SharedFlow", "viewModelScope", "lifecycleScope", or needs to implement async programming, handle structured concurrency, integrate coroutines with Retrofit/Room/WorkManager, or write coroutine…
codex-advisor
Advisory consultation skill for architectural reviews, design decisions, code analysis, and technology evaluation. Codex provides recommendations without making code changes. Invoked by phrases like "consult Codex", "get Codex's opinion", "ask Codex about", "have Codex review", "Codex analysis", "validate this…