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/sudokar/openspec-plus/openspec-plus-applynpx skills add sudokar/openspec-plus --skill openspec-plus-applygit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/sudokar/openspec-plusWhat 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 | $0.00110 | $0.07213 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00055 | $0.03606 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00022 | $0.01443 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00721 |
Grade A, and why
openspec-plus-apply 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 3d 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 — 559 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
OpenSpec Plus Apply
Mission
Wrap vanilla /opsx-apply step 6 (task implementation loop) with subagent orchestration, two-stage review, strict TDD via openspec-plus-tdd, four implementation principles, conditional parallelism over a dependency-validated graph, per-slice + final lint/format/test/other gates, never-ignore-failures rule.
Vanilla owns:
- Step 1 — Select change
- Step 2 —
openspec status --change <name> --json - Step 3 —
openspec instructions apply --change <name> --json - Step 4 — Read context files
- Step 5 — Show progress
- Step 7 — Final status (this skill EMULATES output, not invokes vanilla)
This skill takes over Step 6 only.
RIGID. NEVER skip Phase 0 mode question. NEVER read affected source code files into the main agent's context — pass PATHS to subagents who read them. NEVER mark a slice
[x]while a relevant test is failing or skipped. NEVER run code-quality review before spec-compliance ✅. NEVER dispatch parallel implementer subagents within a change without dependency analysis + user confirmation. NEVER modify spec/design from inside the implementer — escalate to plus-design / plus-spec. NEVER commit code. NEVER take over vanilla steps 1-5 or invoke openspec-verify-change or auto-trigger /opsx-archive.
Red flags — STOP, you are about to violate this skill:
- "Re-read the artifacts to be safe" — vanilla loaded them, in context
- "Let me read the affected source files before dispatching the subagent" — NO (subagent mode). Pass paths. Subagent reads. (Inline mode is different — main agent reads directly.)
- "Critique the spec/design before starting" — done; trust them
- "Fix the spec/design from here while implementing" — escalate, don't edit
- "Mark the test
.skipto move on" — never. Failing tests block progress - "Slice is small, skip the spec-compliance reviewer" — never
- "Implementer's report says DONE, good enough" — verify with reviewer subagents
- "Both reviewers found issues, fix simultaneously" — spec-compliance first, re-review, then code-quality
- "Reviewing is generic, I'll write the review prompt myself" — NO. Every reviewer dispatch reads its
*-prompt.mdand sends the body verbatim; improvising it is the #1 failure mode - "This prompt is long, I'll tighten it / drop the obvious parts when passing it on" — NO. Copy the template's
prompt:block verbatim, substitute only{PLACEHOLDER}s. Every bullet is load-bearing; simplifying silently strips instructions from the subagent - "Should I continue to the next slice?" — never ask. Continuous unless BLOCKED
- "Three fixes failed, try a fourth" — STOP. Artifacts wrong. Pause and exit
- "Run all tests instead of just affected" — wastes time; per-slice gate is scoped
- "Commit as I go" — vanilla doesn't commit; we don't either
- "Run /opsx-archive once everything is done" — only suggest, never auto-trigger
- "Run openspec-verify-change as part of final gate" — out of scope
- "Implementer wrote all tests upfront, that's fine" — TDD violation. One test at a time.
- "Implementer skipped REFACTOR because nothing to refactor" — refactor assessment is mandatory; skipping the assessment is the violation, not the skipping of action
- "AGENTS.md has many rules, implementer applied the ones that felt relevant" — cherry-picking the project's documented rules. Follow them strictly, end-to-end.
- "Implementer did test 1 RED-GREEN-REFACTOR correctly, then batched the rest" — the per-test state machine applies to EVERY test, not just the first
- "Implementer only wrote acceptance tests (one per Gherkin scenario), skipped all unit/edge tests" — acceptance coverage is mandatory but granular tests are encouraged for non-trivial branches, edges, error paths
What ships with it
4 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.
- 3d ago First seen · 559 lines · 110 tokens per session scan A c32c960b4f4f
openspec-plus-apply is a skill published in the GitHub repository sudokar/openspec-plus (154 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 110 tokens to every session and 7,213 once invoked, about $0.0006 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
test-assess
Test agentready assess against real GitHub repositories to validate assessor changes. Selects repos relevant to the change being tested, clones them to a temp directory, runs the local checkout's assessor, reports results and output locations, then cleans up. Use when testing a new or modified assessor, verifying a…
implement-type-annotations
Add comprehensive type hints to Python/TypeScript code to improve IDE support, catch errors early, and enable better AI code understanding.
setup-claude-md
Create comprehensive CLAUDE.md files with tech stack, standard commands, repository structure, and boundaries to optimize repositories for AI-assisted development.
pr-review
Review a GitHub pull request and post one formal review — advance the existing discussion and give precision-first, high-signal feedback. Judgement on the diff, not a build gate — CI validates that it builds, and a targeted probe is allowed as evidence. Use when asked to review a PR or on a cron PR scan.
deep-debugging
Systematic debugging protocol for bugs that resist quick fixes. Use bisection, hypothesis trees, and scientific method when a bug isn't obvious from the stack trace. Goes beyond bugfix-quick for production-grade root cause analysis.
chain-of-verification
Draft → generate verification questions → answer independently via tools → revise. Catches hallucinated facts in reports and reviews. MANDATORY for Phase 4 security/test claims. Paper: Dhuliawala et al. 2023.