Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to racecraft-lab/racecraft-plugins-public. 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/racecraft-lab/racecraft-plugins-public/main/.claude/skills/speckit-validate/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/racecraft-lab/racecraft-plugins-publicWrote 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/racecraft-lab/racecraft-plugins-public/speckit-validate)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/racecraft-lab/racecraft-plugins-public/speckit-validate"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/racecraft-lab/racecraft-plugins-public/speckit-validate/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/racecraft-lab/racecraft-plugins-public/speckit-validate"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/racecraft-lab/racecraft-plugins-public/speckit-validate.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>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 | $0.00020 | $0.00716 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00286 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00143 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00072 |
Grade A, and why
speckit-validate 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 1mo 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.
This is a copy
88% identical to speckit-speckit-utils-validate — 12 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 85 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
User Input
$ARGUMENTS
Outline
Deterministically verify that the implementation matches the specification by checking task completion, file existence, and requirement traceability.
Step 1: Select feature
If $ARGUMENTS specifies a feature name or number, use that. Otherwise, find the most recently modified feature in specs/.
If no features exist, error: "No features found in specs/. Run /speckit.specify first."
Step 2: Parse tasks
Read tasks.md from the feature directory. Parse each checkbox line:
- Extract task text (after
- [x]or- [ ]) - Mark as completed or remaining
- Extract keywords: file paths (
auth/login.py), snake_case names (user_auth), CamelCase names (UserAuth), dotted names (config.yaml)
If no tasks.md exists, error: "No tasks.md found. Run /speckit.tasks first."
Step 3: Verify completed task artifacts
For each completed task that references file paths:
- Search the project directory for the referenced file
- If found: PASS
- If not found: WARN ("task says 'Create auth/login.py' but file not found")
Skip verification for:
- Incomplete tasks (not yet implemented)
- Tasks with no file path references (e.g., "Set up CI pipeline")
Step 4: Parse spec requirements
Read spec.md from the feature directory. Extract items from the "Functional Requirements" section (bulleted list items under that heading).
If no requirements section found, skip to Step 6.
Step 5: Trace requirements to tasks
For each requirement, search task descriptions for matching keywords:
- Tokenize the requirement into significant words (skip stop words)
- Check each task's text for overlap (2+ matching keywords = traced)
Report:
- Requirement with matching tasks: PASS ("traced to Task N")
- Requirement with no matching tasks: WARN ("no task found for this requirement")
Step 6: Report
Output a validation report:
Validation Report: 001-auth
============================
Task Completion: 3/5 (60%)
[x] Task 1: Create auth/login.py -> auth/login.py FOUND
[x] Task 2: Add password hashing -> (no file reference)
[x] Task 3: Write auth tests -> tests/test_auth.py FOUND
[ ] Task 4: Add rate limiting -> (not yet implemented)
[ ] Task 5: Update API docs -> (not yet implemented)
Requirement Traceability: 3/3
"Users can log in with email" -> Task 1 (PASS)
"Passwords are stored securely" -> Task 2 (PASS)
"Users can reset password via email" -> (no matching task - WARN)
Summary: 2 PASS, 1 WARN, 0 FAIL
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 85 lines · 20 tokens per session scan A 55bd292b3148
speckit-validate is a skill published in the GitHub repository racecraft-lab/racecraft-plugins-public (5 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 20 tokens to every session and 716 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 88% identical to speckit-speckit-utils-validate, differing in 12 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
build-executor
Execute an active direct request or approved planned change. Native continuous implementation is the default; existing legacy changes retain their recorded contract obligations.
contract-builder
Maintain an execution contract only for an existing legacy change that requires one. New direct/planned changes do not invoke this skill when a contract is absent.
codex-issue-coordinator
Coordinates a large batch of GitHub issues through separate Codex worker threads, tested pull requests, review loops, and gated merges. Use when the user asks one Codex thread to manage several coding sessions or complete a parent issue, milestone, or issue batch.
plan
Turns a reviewed spec or decided brief into ordered tasks for separate agent runs. Use for implementation tasks, tracker tickets, or useful milestones. Do not use for one coding task or its short execution outline.
review
Uses a fresh agent to review an implementation change without editing it. Checks behavior, security, regressions, complexity, tests, docs, and missing proof. Use for code, PR, diff, security, second-opinion, or pre-merge reviews.
html-doc
Generates a polished, static HTML reading view from an existing Markdown PRD or technical design. Use when a user asks to render, present, visualize, or make a PRD or design document easier for humans to read in a browser.