Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add testdouble/han/plugin install han-researchWrote 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/testdouble/han/gap-analysis)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/testdouble/han/gap-analysis"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/testdouble/han/gap-analysis/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/testdouble/han/gap-analysis"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/testdouble/han/gap-analysis.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 | $0.00091 | $0.07471 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00036 | $0.02988 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.01494 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00747 |
Grade A, and why
gap-analysis scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 422 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Project Context
- CLAUDE.md: !
find . -maxdepth 1 -name "CLAUDE.md" -type f - project-discovery.md: !
find . -maxdepth 3 -name "project-discovery.md" -type f - personal config directory: !
bash "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/han-config-dir.sh" 2>/dev/null || echo "$HOME/.claude" - project .han/config.md: !
cat .han/config.md 2>/dev/null || echo ""
As your first action, use the Read tool on .han/config.md inside the personal config directory path above. A read
that returns no file is no personal configuration: continue silently. When that file or the project .han/config.md
probe supplies content, apply it per config-rule.md, which governs precedence
between the two files, relative-path resolution, and what to do with a file that reads but cannot be used.
Operating Principles
- The
han-core:gap-analyzeragent owns the primary analysis. This skill does not classify gaps itself. It callshan-core:gap-analyzeronce, reads the analyzer's full output file, and synthesizes a stakeholder-readable report from it. - Plain language is the default surface. Sections 1 and 2 of the report never contain file paths, line numbers, function or class names, library mechanics, or language primitives. Technical fidelity is quarantined to Section 3 and only appears when the user has explicitly requested technical details.
- The swarm runs by default. A minimum viable swarm ships at every size:
han-core:adversarial-validatorandhan-core:junior-developeralways, plushan-core:evidence-based-investigatorwhen the current state is concrete enough to verify against. The user may opt out withno swarmto fall back to a lightweight gap-analyzer-only pass. - Evidence rule applies to every gap. Apply the evidence rule from
../../references/evidence-rule.md when characterizing the evidence that
establishes each gap. Name the trust class of every citation pair (codebase, web, provided); apply the corroboration
gate to web-source claims that establish a gap; and label gaps where the desired-state evidence is absent ("the spec
is silent on X") as a distinct state, not as a weak gap. The
han-core:evidence-based-investigatordispatched in the swarm carries codebase findings; the gap analyzer carries the spec-side citations. - Artifact-level analysis caveats are surfaced once, not per gap. Some validator observations apply uniformly to the
whole comparison rather than to any one gap — most commonly a provenance concern about the desired-state artifact as a
whole (for example, "the desired state is a provided, uncommitted, same-session source," which the evidence rule's
providedtrust class genuinely warrants flagging). Surface such an observation a single time as an artifact-level analysis caveat. Do not repeat it as a per-gap verdict on every gap that rests on that artifact, and do not let it raise or lower any gap's confidence — it bears on the whole report equally, so per-gap weighting would double-count one fact. Provenance concerns specific to a single gap's evidence still belong to that gap's verdict. han-core:junior-developerruns the actor-perspective sweep. Gap analysis lives at the feature and behavioral level from a user's or actor's perspective — human end users (and sub-roles like customer, admin, auditor, support agent), API callers, AI agents, integration partners, batch processes, internal services. The han-core:junior-developer's job in the swarm is to check that each gap holds for every actor type the desired state addresses or implies, and to surface gaps the analyzer missed because it only considered one actor type.han-core:plan-synthesizercoordinates Section 4 synthesis at medium and large only. When the swarm reaches four or more agents, the synthesizer consolidates the swarm's confirmations, contradictions, augmentations, and per-gap confidence values for the skill to render. At small swarm size (two or three agents), the skill consolidates deterministically without the synthesizer.- Optional sections must not be load-bearing. A report with only Sections 1 and 2 must stand on its own. Sections 3 and 4 are additive — never required for Sections 1 and 2 to make sense.
- Purpose-conditioned prioritization is a labeled skill judgment, never the analyzer's. The
han-core:gap-analyzerproduces a neutral, unprioritized gap list and must stay that way. When the user states why they are running the comparison (e.g., "before a redesign pass," "to scope the next sprint"), the skill may add one explicitly-labeled "Where to start" pointer view that names the few gaps most blocking that stated purpose. This is the skill's own synthesis judgment — the same kind it already makes when it clusters gaps into themes and derives confidence — layered on top of the neutral list, never replacing it, and omitted entirely when no purpose was given. - Gap IDs are stable for the life of the report. Map
GAP-NNNfrom thehan-core:gap-analyzeroutput toG-NNNin the report, preserving order. Cross-references in Sections 3 and 4 use the sameG-NNNIDs. - The report template lives at gap-analysis-report-template.md. It
was designed by the
han-core:information-architectagent. The skill renders the template by filling placeholders and removing the optional sections that were not requested or generated. - The report is written to the shared readability standard. The skill sources the standard by invoking
han-communication:readability-guidanceand applies it as it writes the report, holding the default audience frame: a capable reader who did not do this work and lacks the author's context. The stable gap IDs (G-NNN) are citation identifiers and survive any rewrite or self-check unchanged.
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 422 lines · 91 tokens per session scan A 9801f3030a24
gap-analysis is a skill published in the GitHub repository testdouble/han (316 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 91 tokens to every session and 7,471 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
gemini
Cross-model second opinion from Google Gemini — a different AI reviewing the same changes, with deep Google ecosystem knowledge. Three modes: review (pass/fail gate for Google Ads campaigns, SEO metadata, or code), challenge (adversarial stress-test that tries to break your changes), and consult (open Q&A with Gemini…
security-architecture-review
Reviews a design or change for security before it ships — authentication and authorization, data handling, secrets, dependencies, and the secure-development practices around it. Use this to review an architecture or pull request for security, set secure coding standards, choose or tune SAST and DAST tooling, assess a…
audit
Project health audit and health check — architecture, performance, tests, dependencies, code quality. Use when assessing overall project health, before releases, or after refactors.
boundaries
Analyze Phoenix context boundaries and module coupling via mix xref. Use when checking cross-context calls, validating dependencies, before splitting modules, or reviewing architecture.
triage
Triage review findings interactively — approve, skip, or prioritize each issue. Use after /phx:review to filter findings before fixing.
pr-threads-address
Address PR review feedback by systematically working through every unresolved PR review thread on the current branch's PR - analyze each comment, make the requested code changes (with tests where useful), commit, and optionally reply and resolve.