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/tesslio/spec-driven-development-tile/work-reviewnpx skills add tesslio/spec-driven-development-tile --skill work-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/tesslio/spec-driven-development-tileWrote 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/tesslio/spec-driven-development-tile/work-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/tesslio/spec-driven-development-tile/work-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tesslio/spec-driven-development-tile/work-review.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00082 | $0.00709 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00041 | $0.00354 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00142 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00071 |
Grade A, and why
work-review 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 4d 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 — 78 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Work Review
Review completed implementation to confirm all spec requirements are satisfied and specs remain accurate.
When to use
- After completing implementation of a spec-driven task
- Before marking a task as done
- When a stakeholder asks to verify completeness
Steps
-
Find relevant specs. Identify all specs whose
targets:match the files changed during implementation:# List changed files, then find specs targeting them git diff --name-only HEAD~1 | head -20 grep -rl "targets:" specs/*.spec.md -
Check each requirement. Walk through every requirement in the spec. For each one:
- Read the target file and confirm the requirement is implemented
- Record the file path and line number where it's implemented (e.g.,
src/auth.py:42) - Verify edge cases called out in the spec are handled
- For each
[@test]link, confirm the test exists and exercises the requirement
-
Run linked tests. Execute all
[@test]paths and record results:grep -rh '\[@test\]' specs/*.spec.md | sed 's/.*\[@test\] *//' | sed 's/`$//'If any test fails, the review cannot pass — diagnose before continuing.
-
Capture ALL discovered requirements. Compare the implementation against the spec and identify every behavioral difference — not just new features, but also:
- Functions or events in the code that the spec doesn't mention
- Behavior that differs from what the spec describes (e.g., silent skip vs. raising an error)
- New error handling paths, default values, or configuration not in the spec
For each discovered requirement:
- Add it to the relevant spec
- Link any tests that were created for it
-
Update spec metadata. If implementation changed the file structure:
- Update
targets:for new, moved, or deleted files - Update
[@test]links for restructured tests
- Update
-
Produce review summary:
## Review: [Spec Name] ### Requirements - [x] Requirement 1 — implemented in src/foo.py:42 - [x] Requirement 2 — implemented in src/bar.py:18 - [ ] Requirement 3 — MISSING: no error handling for empty input ### Discovered requirements - Added: timeout handling for API calls (not in original spec) ### Test results - Linked tests: 5 passed, 0 failed - New tests added: tests/test_timeout.py ### Spec updates - Added timeout requirement to section 3 - Updated targets to include src/baz.py
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 78 lines · 82 tokens per session scan A 158ccbf0ffdb
work-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository tesslio/spec-driven-development-tile (53 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 82 tokens to every session and 709 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
brainstorming
You MUST use this before any creative work - creating features, building components, adding functionality, or modifying behavior. Explores user intent, requirements and design before implementation.
auto-perf-optimize
Run agent-driven VS Code performance or memory investigations. Use when asked to launch Code OSS, automate a VS Code scenario, run the Chat memory smoke runner, capture renderer heap snapshots, take workflow screenshots, compare run summaries, or drive a repeatable scenario before heap-snapshot analysis.
chat-perf
Run chat perf benchmarks and memory leak checks against the local dev build or any published VS Code version. Use when investigating chat rendering regressions, validating perf-sensitive changes to chat UI, or checking for memory leaks in the chat response pipeline.
chat-pet-sprite-creation
Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.
cpu-profile-analysis
Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…