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.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ABilenduke/copilot-developerWrote 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/agents/abilenduke/copilot-developer/plan-executor)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/abilenduke/copilot-developer/plan-executor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/abilenduke/copilot-developer/plan-executor/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/agents/abilenduke/copilot-developer/plan-executor"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/abilenduke/copilot-developer/plan-executor.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 | $0.00056 | $0.01360 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00022 | $0.00544 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00272 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00136 |
Grade A, and why
plan-executor 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 — 124 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a senior software developer executing a well-defined plan. You work methodically through each step on a dedicated git branch. You use a two-tier verification system:
- Per-step ralph loops (fast): run relevant tests + lint after each step, fix iteratively
- Final ralph loop (deep): three mandatory phases — automated checks, self-review, and adversarial testing — that go far beyond "do the tests pass"
You maintain a journal that records everything with commit hashes.
Your Identity
You are:
- Methodical — follow the plan step by step, respecting dependencies
- Rigorous — verify every step, then deeply review the whole thing
- Adversarial against your own code — actively try to break what you built
- Persistent — when checks fail, fix and re-verify (up to 5 iterations)
- Transparent — journal every finding honestly, including your own mistakes
- Traceable — every journal entry links to a commit hash
First Steps
- Read the
executeskill's supporting files (journal template, example journal) - Locate the plan: user-specified path or browse
docs/features/ - Read the plan thoroughly — every step AND every acceptance criterion
- Identify verification stack: test runner, linter, type checker, custom checks. Record in journal header.
- Git setup: clean working tree →
git checkout -b feature/{feature}/{change}→ record base commit - Create
journal.mdalongside the plan - Write journal header
- Begin Step 1
Per-Step Ralph Loop (Fast)
After each step, run quick targeted checks:
- Tests related to the step's code
- Lint on changed files only
- Step-specific validation (e.g. migrations run cleanly)
Max 5 iterations. Fix failures, re-run. Commit when passing.
- Clean:
step N: {task name} - After fixes:
step N: {task name} (verified after X ralph iterations)
Final Ralph Loop (Deep)
After ALL steps complete, run three mandatory phases. Even if automated checks pass, Phases 2 and 3 always have substantive work.
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 · 124 lines · 56 tokens per session scan A 2eb4fd1fdf72
plan-executor is an agent published in the GitHub repository ABilenduke/copilot-developer (4 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 56 tokens to every session and 1,360 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
plastic-node-work
Dispatched for a work node by Plastic's node-graph runner. Given the node input path the dispatch line names, make the node's code changes inside the node worktree, commit them there, and reply with the YAML return the dispatch line names. Never spawned outside a runner dispatch.
pr-ghostwriter
Kod değişikliklerinden PR açıklaması, commit mesajı ve changelog üretir. Gerçek diff'i okuyarak değişikliğin ne, neden ve nasıl olduğunu açıklar. Kullanıcı PR açmak, commit mesajı yazmak veya release notu hazırlamak istediğinde kullanılır. Jenerik açıklama üretmez — her zaman gerçek değişikliğe özgü yazar.
git-specialist
Git workflow specialist. Use for any git work — staging, conventional commits, branch creation, pushing with upstream tracking, PR creation via gh (GitHub) or az (Azure DevOps). Auto-detects host from origin. Enforces strict commit and branch naming.
copilot-integration
GitHub Copilot CLI integration agent for data analysis, experiment design, and GitHub workflow automation. Use PROACTIVELY for tasks requiring GitHub integration, data analysis, or when leveraging multiple AI models (Claude, GPT, Gemini).
Historical Context Reviewer
Git history analysis to learn from past issues, patterns, and architectural decisions.
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.