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 wot-ui/wot-starter --skill openspec-verify-changegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/wot-ui/wot-starterWrote 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/wot-ui/wot-starter/openspec-verify-change)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/wot-ui/wot-starter/openspec-verify-change"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/wot-ui/wot-starter/openspec-verify-change/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/wot-ui/wot-starter/openspec-verify-change"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/wot-ui/wot-starter/openspec-verify-change.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 | $0.00032 | $0.01731 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00865 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00346 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00173 |
Grade A, and why
openspec-verify-change 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 8d 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.
This is a copy
98% identical to openspec-verify-change — 1 line differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 176 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Verify that an implementation matches the change artifacts (specs, tasks, design).
Store selection: If the user names a store (a store is a standalone OpenSpec repo registered on this machine) or the work lives in one, run openspec store list --json to discover registered store ids, then pass --store <id> on the commands that read or write specs and changes (new change, status, instructions, list, show, validate, archive, doctor, context, schemas, view). Once selected, treat --store <id> as sticky for the rest of the workflow. Every unscoped example of those commands below is shorthand: before running it, append the flag. For example, run openspec status --change "<name>" --json --store "<id>", not the unscoped form shown below. Other commands do not take the flag. Hints printed by commands already carry the flag; keep it on follow-ups. Without a store, commands act on the nearest local openspec/ root.
Input: Optionally specify a change name. If omitted, check if it can be inferred from conversation context. If vague or ambiguous you MUST prompt for available changes.
Steps
-
Select the change
If a name is provided, use it. Otherwise:
- Infer from conversation context if the user mentioned a change
- Auto-select if only one active change exists
- If ambiguous, run
openspec list --jsonto get available changes and ask the user to select one
When prompting, show changes that have implementation tasks (tasks artifact exists). Include the schema used for each change if available. Mark changes with incomplete tasks as "(In Progress)".
Always announce: "Using change: " and how to override (e.g.,
/openspec-verify-change <other>). -
Check status to understand the schema
openspec status --change "<name>" --jsonParse the JSON to understand:
schemaName: The workflow being used (e.g., "spec-driven")planningHome,changeRoot,artifactPaths, andactionContext: path and scope context- Which artifacts exist for this change
-
Get planning context and load artifacts
openspec instructions apply --change "<name>" --jsonThis returns the change directory and
contextFiles(artifact ID -> array of concrete file paths). Read all available artifacts fromcontextFiles. -
Initialize verification report structure
Create a report structure with three dimensions:
- Completeness: Track tasks and spec coverage
- Correctness: Track requirement implementation and scenario coverage
- Coherence: Track design adherence and pattern consistency
Each dimension can have CRITICAL, WARNING, or SUGGESTION issues.
-
Verify Completeness
Task Completion:
- If
contextFiles.tasksexists, read every file path in it - Parse checkboxes:
- [ ](incomplete) vs- [x](complete) - Count complete vs total tasks
- If incomplete tasks exist:
- Add CRITICAL issue for each incomplete task
- Recommendation: "Complete task: " or "Mark as done if already implemented"
Spec Coverage:
- If delta specs exist in
contextFiles.specs:- Extract all requirements (marked with "### Requirement:")
- For each requirement:
- Search codebase for keywords related to the requirement
- Assess if implementation likely exists
- If requirements appear unimplemented:
- Add CRITICAL issue: "Requirement not found: "
- Recommendation: "Implement requirement X: "
- If
-
Verify Correctness
Requirement Implementation Mapping:
- For each requirement from delta specs:
- Search codebase for implementation evidence
- If found, note file paths and line ranges
- Assess if implementation matches requirement intent
- If divergence detected:
- Add WARNING: "Implementation may diverge from spec: "
- Recommendation: "Review : against requirement X"
- For each requirement from delta specs:
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 176 lines · 32 tokens per session scan A bb8da1713b45
openspec-verify-change is a skill published in the GitHub repository wot-ui/wot-starter (386 stars, last pushed 11d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 32 tokens to every session and 1,731 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 98% identical to openspec-verify-change, differing in 1 line, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
subagent-dev
A development workflow that divides an implementation plan into independent tasks, assigns fresh coding agents to them, and reviews each result before a final review.
check
Run the full local quality gate (prek hooks + tox test matrix) before committing or opening a pull request. Use when asked to "check", "lint", "run CI locally", or verify a change is ready.
privacy-first
Prevent email addresses and personal data from entering the codebase. Use when user asks to "prevent emails", "remove personal data", "privacy check", "no email", or when writing/editing any Rust code, Cargo.toml, config, or documentation files. Also triggers during code review, quality gate checks, or when adding…
skill-evaluator
Reusable skill for evaluating other skills with structure checks, eval coverage review, and real usage spot checks. Use when you need to check a skill, add evals, benchmark a skill, validate outputs against assertions, or compare current skill behavior against a baseline.
lint-rust
Run comprehensive linting and static analysis on Rust code including clippy, format check, security audit, supply chain, and unused dependencies. Use before committing, during CI, or when reviewing code quality. Triggers: "lint rust", "clippy", "static analysis", "code quality".
secret-lint
Automated secret scanning using secretlint to prevent credential leaks.