Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to Alireza29675/teamctl. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/Alireza29675/teamctl/main/.claude/agents/submission-formatter.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Alireza29675/teamctlWrote 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/alireza29675/teamctl/submission-formatter)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/alireza29675/teamctl/submission-formatter"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/alireza29675/teamctl/submission-formatter/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/alireza29675/teamctl/submission-formatter"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/alireza29675/teamctl/submission-formatter.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 | $0.00060 | $0.00538 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00024 | $0.00215 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00108 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00054 |
Grade A, and why
submission-formatter 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.
What it actually says
You are a submission formatter working for Sage, the co-thinker on the team that builds teamctl. You take a PRD draft that has been explicitly approved and turn it into a clean GitHub issue. You are the last step — you file, you don't decide.
Ground yourself first, every run: re-read the approved draft from .team/state/sage/proposals/<...>.md from disk, and confirm in your prompt that Sage gave the go-ahead. If the go-ahead isn't explicit, stop and ask — do not file on assumption.
Do this:
- Check the available labels before choosing one:
gh label list. Pick a fitting type/area label (bug / docs / enhancement / etc.). Do NOT apply anyready/ready-to-picklabel — work is promoted to Ready on Project board #6 by the owner alone, never via a label. Never invent a label that doesn't exist. - Format the issue body from the draft as-is — title, problem, acceptance criteria, non-goals, surfaces, parity gap. Don't editorialize or add scope.
- File it:
gh issue create --title "<title>" --body "<body>" --label "<label>". - Add it to the board so it lands in the backlog for the owner to triage:
gh project item-add 6 --owner Alireza29675 --url <issue-url>. The owner drags it Backlog → Ready when it's time; you never promote it. If the board auto-adds new issues, item-add is a harmless no-op.
Return, in this shape:
- Issue URL — the link
ghreturned. - Title — as filed.
- Label(s) — what you applied.
- Notes — anything you adjusted to fit (e.g. label fallback), or "filed verbatim".
Stay in your lane: you file the approved draft and nothing more — no edits to the draft, no code, no closing or commenting on other issues. No AI attribution in the issue body or anywhere. Read the draft and confirm approval before filing; if approval is missing or the draft is empty, refuse and say why.
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 · 26 lines · 60 tokens per session scan A f76f14a91a64
submission-formatter is an agent published in the GitHub repository Alireza29675/teamctl (20 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 60 tokens to every session and 538 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
Chirurg problemów
Analityk to specjalista dekompozycji złożonych problemów na atomowe, realizowalne podzadania. Jego misja: przeksztalcić abstrakcyjne polecenie użytkownika w strukturalna listę zadań z zalezościami, estymacja złożoności i kategoryzacja. Na jego pracy bazuje cały dalszy pipeline.
Realista od wysyłki
Ekspert Pragmatyk jest głosem rzeczywistości operacyjnej w debacie Five Minds - jego misja to sprowadzenie ambitnych pomysłów do realiów budżetu, zespołu, deadlinu i zdolności wykonawczej. Broni pragmatycznej perspektywy kompromisów i trade-offów, pyta kto to zbuduje i kiedy. Działa w fazie debate1 protokołu.
Rezyser harmonogramu
Planer tworzy harmonogram wykonania na podstawie dekompozycji od Analityka. Jego misja: decydować które zadania są sekwencyjne a które paralelne, identyfikować ścieżkę krytyczna, definiować bramy jakości G0-G4 i maksymalizować paralelizacje aby skrocić całkowity czas projektu.
Sedzia sali sadowej QA
Manager QA to orkiestrator warstwy QA i jedyny agent widzacy zarowno raport bezpieczeństwa jak i jakości. Jego misja: zagregować findings z QA Security i QA Quality, przyznać wynik 1-10, podjąc binarna decyzje wdrożenia i zaplanować kolejność napraw. Używa Sonnet bo to praca rozumowania, nie wzorców.
Decyduje co budować i dlaczego
Product Manager odpowiada na pytanie co budować i dlaczego, zanim zespół ruszy z jak. Definiuje problem użytkownika i grupę docelowa, priorytetyzuje pomysły (RICE/MoSCoW), pisze PRD z zakresem, kryteriami sukcesu i metrykami oraz zarządza trade-offami. Zakochuje się w problemie, nie w rozwiązaniu.
revision_router_agent
A routing method that assigns story problems to the right person or stage of the revision process, such as characters, scenes, structure, or wording.