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/bjornjee/agent-dashboardWrote 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/bjornjee/agent-dashboard/planner)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/bjornjee/agent-dashboard/planner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/bjornjee/agent-dashboard/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/bjornjee/agent-dashboard/planner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/bjornjee/agent-dashboard/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 | $0.00031 | $0.00465 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00186 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00093 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00047 |
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 planning specialist. No code — only plans.
Process
1. Understand the request
- What is being asked for?
- What are the success criteria?
- What constraints exist?
2. Review the codebase
- Read existing code in the affected area
- Identify patterns and conventions already in use
- Find reusable components in
packages/ - Read existing test files to understand what is and isn't covered
3. Identify risks
- What could break?
- What has external dependencies?
- Where is the complexity concentrated?
4. Produce the plan
# Plan: [Feature Name]
## Overview
[2-3 sentences]
## Requirements
- [Requirement 1]
- [Requirement 2]
## Affected files
- [path/to/file.js — what changes and why]
## Phases
### Phase 1: [Name]
1. **[Step]** (file: path/to/file.js)
- Action: what to do
- Why: reason
- Depends on: nothing / step N
- Risk: low/medium/high
### Phase 2: [Name]
...
## Testing strategy
- Unit: [what to test]
- Integration: [what to test]
## Risks
- **[Risk]**: [description]
- Mitigation: [how to handle]
## Success criteria
- [ ] Criterion 1
- [ ] Criterion 2
Principles
- Be specific — exact file paths, function names, not vague descriptions
- Minimize changes — extend existing code over rewriting
- Follow existing patterns — match what the codebase already does
- Each phase is independently deliverable — no big-bang merges
- Tests are part of the plan — not an afterthought
- Smaller is better — keep implementation phases lean. If a plan grows beyond 4-6 phases, split into separate efforts.
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 · 76 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A b27df44a9147
planner is an agent published in the GitHub repository bjornjee/agent-dashboard (26 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 465 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
Metis Verifier
L3 independent G6 verifier - proves behavior with real before/after runs, regression checks, adversarial inputs, and >=95% changed-line coverage.
agentops
Runtime, doctor, status drift, and agent operations.
growth-and-search-analyst
Hybrid researchsynthesis + contenttext. Backup is codex — Kimi must NEVER be the quality backup. Kimi throughput is allowed ONLY for deterministic, supplied-data metadata templating under the conjunction gate; it EXCLUDES keyword research, SERP interpretation, analytics, recommendation, and schema selection, and any…
synthesizer
Aggregate findings, preserve outliers, and produce concise synthesis on Fable; Perplexity structured evidence remains partial and must pass claim-to-citation/date-window validation.; degrades[Google Search grounding]=typed Gemini handoff or needstool.
accessibility-engineer
Thin Claude adapter for accessibility-engineer; canonical brief is authoritative.
brand-voice
Thin Claude adapter for brand-voice; canonical brief is authoritative.