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 skills add sudokar/openspec-plus --skill openspec-plus-proposalgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/sudokar/openspec-plusWrote 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/sudokar/openspec-plus/openspec-plus-proposal)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/sudokar/openspec-plus/openspec-plus-proposal"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sudokar/openspec-plus/openspec-plus-proposal/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/sudokar/openspec-plus/openspec-plus-proposal"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sudokar/openspec-plus/openspec-plus-proposal.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 2 findings, up to medium
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- medium Data Exfiltration · line 67 Data is being sent to an external URL. This could be legitimate telemetry or data exfiltration. Manual review is recommended.Fix: Verify the destination URL is trusted and necessary. Remove or replace with documented APIs. Ensure no secrets, tokens, or PII are transmitted.
- medium Excessive Agency · line 122 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
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 | $0.00082 | $0.02827 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00033 | $0.01131 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00565 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00283 |
Grade A, and why
openspec-plus-proposal 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 221 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
OpenSpec Plus Proposal
Mission
Brainstorming-style interactive discovery for OpenSpec proposals. Produce a lean Why / What Changes / Capabilities / Impact proposal at intent level — never sliding into design, spec, or implementation.
OpenSpec provides the format and template (resolved dynamically in Phase 0). This skill provides the process discipline: five-lens Q&A, decomposition check, scope discipline, subagent review.
Inputs
- User request — authoritative for intent
- Existing proposals in
openspec/changes/— for terminology and convention only - NEVER read source code — proposal is intent, not implementation grounding
Workflow
Four phases. NEVER skip, merge, or reorder.
Phase -1: Auto-Update Check (once per session)
Phase 0: Schema & Template Resolution
Phase 1: Interactive Discovery (5-lens Q&A)
Phase 2: Write & Artifact Compliance Review
Workflow Visibility (MANDATORY)
Display workflow phases via task tool at start; update as each phase completes.
Core Principles
- Understand Before Defining — seek the problem before describing the change; never jump to proposed solutions.
- Goals Before Solutions — solution language ("add Redis", "use Postgres") → redirect to the underlying problem and goal.
- Scope Boundaries Are Critical — non-goals as deliberate as in-scope items; strong non-goals reduce future scope creep.
- YAGNI — No Speculative Scope — every scope item traces to a stated user need or stakeholder concern.
- Respect Project Standards — read project instruction files (
AGENTS.md,CLAUDE.md,GEMINI.md, equivalents) at Phase 1 start; use project terminology; conflicts → surface to user, never silently override.
Phase -1: Auto-Update Check (MANDATORY — once per session)
Run FIRST, before Phase 0. Skip if already run this session.
- Read
openspec/.plus/config.yaml:settings.autoUpdateCheckisfalse→ skip Phase -1 entirely, proceed to Phase 0- Missing/unreadable, or not
false→ continue
- Read
openspec/.plus/last-update-check:- File exists AND timestamp is within 7 days of today → skip immediately, proceed to Phase 0
- Missing or older than 7 days → continue:
- Fetch
https://api.github.com/repos/sudokar/openspec-plus/releases/latest(single JSON object). Read thetag_namefield and strip the leadingvif present. This is the remote version. - Compare remote version with
openspec/.plus/VERSION(local) - If remote > local → prompt the user using the question tool:
🔔 OpenSpec Plus v{remote} is available (you have v{local}).
- Option 1: Upgrade (Recommended)
- Option 2: Upgrade later
- If user selects Upgrade → display the install/update link:
https://github.com/sudokar/openspec-plus#-install--updateand STOP. Do NOT continue to Phase 0 — the user should run the install/update prompt first and restart the session. - If user selects Upgrade later → proceed to Phase 0 normally.
- Write current timestamp to
openspec/.plus/last-update-check
- Fetch
- Network/file errors → silently continue. NEVER block the workflow for network issues — proceed to Phase 0.
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 Changed · +2 lines 186ef8fcc682
- 1mo ago First seen · 219 lines · 82 tokens per session scan A 792016f76c15
openspec-plus-proposal is a skill published in the GitHub repository sudokar/openspec-plus (214 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 82 tokens to every session and 2,827 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5.5. 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
ai-code-generation-guardrails
Use when reviewing AI-generated code before merge or execution: plan AST/security checks, isolated behavior tests and evidence, with language-specific coverage limits.
implement-type-annotations
Add comprehensive type hints to Python/TypeScript code to improve IDE support, catch errors early, and enable better AI code understanding.
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.
tech-writing
Write professional technical documents — requirements/PRD, tech spec/design doc, low-level design, decision records, and trade-off analysis — at a formality tier matched to the task. Grounds every claim in real code or a cited source, marks what it could not verify, and refuses to pad. Use when asked to write/update a…
plan-orchestrator
Route hierarchical-planning intents to the correct backing script. Use when the user invokes /aura-frog:plan (with or without subcommand), mentions plan verbs (expand/next/replan/promote/archive/freeze/thaw/undo/status/conflicts), or types a plan-vocabulary bare word with .claude/plans/active.json present. Owns verb…
perf-profiling
Systematic performance profiling and optimization across frontend (Core Web Vitals, code splitting, lazy loading), backend (N+1 queries, async), and database (EXPLAIN ANALYZE, indexing) layers. Use when the user reports slow code, latency, memory leaks, needs to benchmark, or wants to speed up an application. Measure…