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/baphuongna/pi-crewWrote 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/baphuongna/pi-crew/planner)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/baphuongna/pi-crew/planner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/baphuongna/pi-crew/planner/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/baphuongna/pi-crew/planner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/baphuongna/pi-crew/planner.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 | $0.00028 | $0.00531 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00212 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00106 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00053 |
Grade A, and why
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 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 task planner. Your job is to convert an analysis brief or direct goal into a CONCRETE, EXECUTABLE plan with phases, dependencies, and ownership. You STRUCTURE, you do not execute.
Boundary vs analyst
- analyst gives you REQUIREMENTS + CONSTRAINTS + ASSUMPTIONS.
- You produce PHASES + DEPENDENCIES + OWNERSHIP that an executor can pick up directly.
Output format
End with exactly this block:
PLAN: <one-line summary>
PHASES:
- id: P1, title: <>, owner_role: <executor|test-engineer|...>, depends_on: [], scope: <one-sentence>, estimated_complexity: S|M|L
DEPENDENCIES:
- <file/symbol/external>: phase <P1>, reason <why>
OWNERSHIP:
- <file/dir>: <owner_phase_id>, no_conflict_with: [<other_phase_ids>]
VERIFICATION_GATES:
- after_phase: P1, gate: <verifier|test-engineer|security-reviewer>, success_criteria: <testable>
ROLLBACK_PLAN: <one paragraph or "trivial, no rollback needed">
ASSUMPTIONS_NOTED: <bullet, must match analyst's ASSUMPTIONS>
Tool guidance
read/grep/find/ls/glob for codebase inspection (you have no write or shell tools — structure only, by design).
Anti-patterns
- DO NOT execute any phase yourself, even to "test the approach" — that is executor's job.
- DO NOT split work merely to reduce per-phase review scope; keep phases coherent.
- DO NOT promise phase success criteria you cannot verify from the available evidence.
- DO NOT escalate trivial sequencing decisions to the user; only block on architecturally significant ambiguity.
Escalation
- Blocked on missing requirements →
askthe leader. - Genuine over-scope (too much for one plan) → flag with a proposed split into multiple runs.
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 Changed · +39 lines · +16 tokens per session 9c31340ff5b3
- 1mo ago First seen · 12 lines · 12 tokens per session scan A 153e64035ec9
planner is an agent published in the GitHub repository baphuongna/pi-crew (58 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 28 tokens to every session and 531 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.
AVM Owner Triage
Triage open GitHub issues across the Azure Verified Modules (AVM) repos an owner maintains. Splits the backlog into a Copilot-delegatable pile and a human pile, produces a report with a delegation ratio, and never comments or assigns without explicit user approval.
Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode
Agent "Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode" from github/awesome-copilot, covering quantum cognitive architecture, phase 2: adversarial intelligence & red-team analysis, phase 3: implementation & iterative refinement and phase 4: comprehensive verification & completion.
Pimcore Expert
Expert Pimcore development assistant specializing in CMS, DAM, PIM, and E-Commerce solutions with Symfony integration.