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 terrene-foundation/kailash-coc-claude-py --skill spec-compliancegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/terrene-foundation/kailash-coc-claude-pyWrote 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/terrene-foundation/kailash-coc-claude-py/spec-compliance)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/terrene-foundation/kailash-coc-claude-py/spec-compliance"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/terrene-foundation/kailash-coc-claude-py/spec-compliance/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/terrene-foundation/kailash-coc-claude-py/spec-compliance"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/terrene-foundation/kailash-coc-claude-py/spec-compliance.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 3 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 Prompt Injection · line 37 Large whitespace padding was detected (a block of blank lines or a long run of spaces). This can push injected instructions below or to the right of the visible area so a human reviewer never sees them while the agent still reads them. Manual review of the hidden content is recommended.Fix: Remove the large whitespace padding (blank-line blocks or long space runs) and review any content hidden below or to the right of it. Keep skill files compact and reviewable so no instructions can be
- medium Prompt Injection · line 40 Large whitespace padding was detected (a block of blank lines or a long run of spaces). This can push injected instructions below or to the right of the visible area so a human reviewer never sees them while the agent still reads them. Manual review of the hidden content is recommended.Fix: Remove the large whitespace padding (blank-line blocks or long space runs) and review any content hidden below or to the right of it. Keep skill files compact and reviewable so no instructions can be
- medium Prompt Injection · line 42 Large whitespace padding was detected (a block of blank lines or a long run of spaces). This can push injected instructions below or to the right of the visible area so a human reviewer never sees them while the agent still reads them. Manual review of the hidden content is recommended.Fix: Remove the large whitespace padding (blank-line blocks or long space runs) and review any content hidden below or to the right of it. Keep skill files compact and reviewable so no instructions can be
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 | $0.00027 | $0.02923 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00014 | $0.01461 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00585 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00292 |
Grade A, and why
spec-compliance 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 — 237 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Spec Compliance Audit
File existence is NOT compliance. A file wrapper_base.py may exist while none of the spec-required classes inside it do. This skill defines how to verify spec compliance via direct code inspection — AST parsing and targeted greps — instead of trusting that a file at the right path means the right content is there.
When to Use
/redteamStep 1 — primary use, every round/codifyvalidation gate before knowledge capture- Any "is the plan implemented?" question
The Failure Mode This Prevents
A previous BUILD repo run reported "39/39 PASS, 0 CRITICAL, 0 HIGH" via a convergence-verify.py script. A follow-up deep audit found 27+ CRITICAL findings:
StreamingAgent.run_stream()was a fake stream — yielded one syntheticTextDeltafrom a single innerrun_async()callBaseAgentConfig.posturefield didn't exist (grep returned 0 hits in entirekaizen/core/)@deprecateddecorator was defined indeprecation.pybut never imported bybase_agent.pyclient.pywas COPIED, not MOVED — both source and destination existed at full size, drifting apart- New wrapper modules had ZERO test coverage (
grep "from kaizen_agents.wrapper_base" tests/returned empty) - Spec § Security Threats subsections existed only in spec text — no
test_<threat>functions
The convergence script existed but it was an existence checker ((path / "__init__.py").exists()), not a compliance checker. The audit must NOT rely on self-reports written by previous rounds.
The Method: Spec → Acceptance Assertions → AST/Grep
For each spec section, write down a literal acceptance assertion table, then verify each row against the actual code. Re-derive every check from scratch each round.
Step 1: Extract Acceptance Assertions From Spec
Read the spec text verbatim. For each promised artifact, write the literal assertion:
| Spec promise | Acceptance assertion |
|---|---|
"StreamingAgent.run_stream() yields TextDelta tokens incrementally" |
grep def run_stream in src; AST: must yield ≥2 distinct values across the loop, NOT a single yield from a single inner.run_async() call |
"BaseAgentConfig has frozen field posture: Posture" |
grep posture: in BaseAgentConfig dataclass body |
"@deprecated decorator applied to 7 extension points" |
grep @deprecated in base_agent.py — must hit ≥7 distinct methods |
"MOVE handler.py from app/legacy/ to app/v2/" |
source must be deleted OR <50 LOC OR import-and-warn shim |
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 · 237 lines · 27 tokens per session scan A 0c00d022409c
spec-compliance is a skill published in the GitHub repository terrene-foundation/kailash-coc-claude-py (12 stars, last pushed 24d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 27 tokens to every session and 2,923 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
adversarial-reviewer
Adversarial code review that assumes bugs exist and hunts for them. Use when asked to review code, find bugs, audit for correctness, stress-test a PR, or when someone says "tear this apart" or "what's wrong with this". Give no benefit of the doubt — every line is guilty until proven innocent.
gsd-ns-review
Route to the appropriate quality / review skill based on the user's intent. gsd-code-review-fix was absorbed by gsd-code-review --fix in #2790.
issue
Use when starting a chain from a GitHub issue — turning an issue URL or number into a triaged, planned, dispatched, and reviewed pull request. Classifies the thread (bug → root-cause discipline, feature → plan chain, question → drafted reply), synthesizes a spec from the issue's own acceptance criteria, then runs the…
gitnexus
A code-graph analysis add-on for examining an existing codebase, including symbols, call paths, execution flows, and effects across repositories. It can query GitNexus through its command-line or MCP interfaces.
cleanup-code-inspections
Reduce technical debt and improve code quality by systematically resolving static analysis warnings.
sonarqube-mcp
Provides SonarQube and SonarCloud integration patterns via the Model Context Protocol (MCP) server. Enables quality gate monitoring, issue discovery and triaging, pre-push code analysis, and rule education directly in the agent workflow. Use when the user wants to check quality gates, search for Sonar issues, analyze…