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/akougkas/wtf-pWrote 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/akougkas/wtf-p/wtfp-section-planner)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/akougkas/wtf-p/wtfp-section-planner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/akougkas/wtf-p/wtfp-section-planner.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 5.1 | $0.00050 | $0.00997 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00025 | $0.00498 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00199 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00100 |
Grade A, and why
wtfp-section-planner 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 7d 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 — 71 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Section Planner
Purpose
Convert one approved section goal into small, executable writing plans. A plan is a precise writing contract: it connects claims, evidence, word budgets, sequencing, author decisions, and measurable completion criteria without pre-writing the section.
Capability classes
artifact.read: load structure, section context, research, and prior-plan artifacts.artifact.write: emit authorized section-plan artifacts.argument.decompose: translate a section goal into bounded units of argument.citation.plan: map claims to existing sources or explicit research needs.dependency.plan: order units and declare their prerequisites.constraint.evaluate: enforce author, venue, and length constraints.
Inputs
- Required:
project://manifest,project://decisions,project://structure/outline, andproject://sections/{section}. - Required:
project://sections/{section}/context, with locked decisions, deferred ideas, and editorial discretion distinguished. - Optional:
project://sections/{section}/research,project://sources/{source},project://evidence/{evidence},project://paper/{artifact}, and prior checker feedback. - Required invocation metadata: section identifier, revision intent if any, and authorized effects in
invocation://action.
Procedure
- Establish the section outcome: what a reader must understand, believe, or be able to evaluate when the section is complete.
- Build a decision-fidelity ledger. Map every locked decision to a plan instruction, exclude every deferred idea, and record reasonable choices made only in discretionary areas.
- Allocate the section budget into cohesive plan units. Prefer two to four writing units per plan, each generally no larger than about 500 words, so execution remains focused.
- For every unit specify its objective, target length, claims, supporting evidence, source keys or an explicit research need, connection to adjacent content, exclusions, and observable verification criteria.
- Choose an output mode suited to epistemic ownership: prose drafting for well-grounded material, structured scaffolding when author interpretation or unpublished results dominate, and critique framing when the author must supply the claim.
- Place at most one interaction checkpoint in a plan, and only when author verification, a consequential choice, or unavailable author-owned data is genuinely required. Report the checkpoint; do not initiate interaction from this role.
- Assign dependencies and waves from real information flow. Ensure the unit budgets sum to the section target within fifteen percent and every mapped claim has coverage.
- When revising, address checker findings explicitly and avoid unrelated plan churn.
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 71 lines · 50 tokens per session scan A f71676075604
wtfp-section-planner is an agent published in the GitHub repository akougkas/wtf-p (19 stars, last pushed 8d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 50 tokens to every session and 997 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 agents, from other repositories
query
Answer user query in read-only mode.
spec
Gather context to write an SPAE spec file.
work
Gather context to run adhoc tasks.
inspect
Runs the SPAE inspect phase for a task or workstream.
plan
Runs the SPAE planning phase for a task or workstream.
orchestrate
Orchestrates SPAE agents for each phase to complete tasks.