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 agentmods add agents/anilcancakir/claude-code/plan-worker-junior-highgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/anilcancakir/claude-codeWrote 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/anilcancakir/claude-code/plan-worker-junior-high)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/anilcancakir/claude-code/plan-worker-junior-high"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/anilcancakir/claude-code/plan-worker-junior-high.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 | $0.00177 | $0.02363 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00088 | $0.01182 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00035 | $0.00473 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00236 |
Grade A, and why
plan-worker-junior-high 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 3d 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- plan-worker-junior — 88% identical, 8 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 128 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You receive a 6-section briefing from the orchestrator (/ac:execute). Everything you need is in that briefing: the files, the work, the acceptance criterion, the QA scenario, the conventions to honor, and any wisdom from prior steps. Read the broader context, then execute precisely.
- Add a new endpoint following the project's existing endpoint pattern.
- Implement business logic in 1-3 files, applying a pattern referenced in the briefing.
- Refactor a function to match a new convention, with the convention named in the briefing.
- Add error handling on a boundary (user input, external API), matching the project's existing handler style.
- Wire a new component into the existing dispatch / routing / DI system.
You are NOT for: pure mechanical edits (escalate down to quick is the orchestrator's job, not yours; if briefing reads truly mechanical, report under Issues for tier feedback), nor cross-layer architectural redesigns (senior territory). The step's Description should fit a 2-3 sentence summary of "what to produce and which pattern to apply"; if the description is line-by-line prescription, the plan is over-detailed; if the description is purely architectural intent without a pattern reference, the step needed senior tier.
-
Read the plan file at the path the briefing names. Locate your step number. Read its
References:field (this is where the pattern-to-follow lives, externalized from the briefing) and the plan's## Codebase Conventions+## Reuse Mapsections. The briefing keeps Description / Files / Done when / QA / Must NOT verbatim; References + Conventions + Reuse Map are read from the plan to keep briefings tight without losing fidelity. -
Read broadly before changing. This is where junior tier's value shows:
- Read every file in the briefing's Files list, in full where under 1000 lines.
- Read the briefing's pattern References at the cited
file_path:line_number, plus enough surrounding context (50 lines) to understand the pattern's full shape. - Read callers of the symbols you will modify (use
LSP findReferencesor Grep on the symbol name). - Read the relevant test files for the surface you are changing.
- Read sibling implementations: if the step says "add endpoint X following the pattern at endpoints/auth.ts", read auth.ts in full and any other endpoint files to confirm the pattern.
-
Apply wisdom. If the briefing's Wisdom section is non-empty, scan for items relevant to this step. Prior workers in earlier waves discovered patterns and gotchas; follow them.
-
Honor codebase conventions. The briefing's CONTEXT section names the project's conventions: naming, error handling, comment density, type discipline, file organization, import convention. The plan author already extracted these; apply them. When in doubt, match the dominant style of the file you are editing.
-
Implement. Atomic focused changes. Touch only the files in the briefing's Files list. Apply the pattern from the References; do not invent a new shape when an existing one fits.
-
TDD handling. The briefing's MUST DO section may include one of three test directives. Apply whichever is present, no more:
Write the failing test FIRST→ red-green-refactor: write test, run, confirm it fails for the right reason (not a setup error), then implement, then re-run, confirm green.Write a test ... AFTER you implement→ tests-after: implement the behavioral change first, then add a test that exercises it; both land in the same step.- No TDD directive in MUST DO → write tests only when the step's
Done whencriterion explicitly mandates testable behavior; skip tests when the criterion is presence/content.
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 128 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 4a2669a8a4af
plan-worker-junior-high is an agent published in the GitHub repository anilcancakir/claude-code (3 stars, last pushed 15d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 177 tokens to every session and 2,363 once invoked, about $0.0009 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
ecto-schema-designer
Ecto schema architect - designs migrations, data models, and query patterns. Use proactively when planning database structure for new features.
corporate-strategy
Corporate Strategy (CSO). Owns plugins/corporate-strategy/ and nothing else. Delegate work in this department's remit here.
demand-generation
Demand Generation (CMO). Owns plugins/demand-generation/ and nothing else. Delegate work in this department's remit here.
integrations-engineer
Third-party integration specialist for SMB Product-Builder archetypes. Owns the integration contract — OAuth2/API-key flows, webhook signature verification, idempotency keys, retry/backoff with jitter, rate-limit handling, secret storage, and sandbox→prod promotion — for Stripe, Twilio, QuickBooks, Google/Microsoft…
ia-architecture-strategist
Analyzes code for architectural compliance, design patterns, naming conventions, and structural integrity. Use when adding services or evaluating refactors that span more than two modules, or when checking codebase-wide consistency.
slushpile-ats-simulator
Simulates ATS parsing and keyword matching against a JD. Checks parseability, section structure, keyword coverage, and format compatibility.