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/byerlikaya/claude-starter-kitWrote 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/byerlikaya/claude-starter-kit/planner-csk)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/byerlikaya/claude-starter-kit/planner-csk"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/byerlikaya/claude-starter-kit/planner-csk/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/byerlikaya/claude-starter-kit/planner-csk"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/byerlikaya/claude-starter-kit/planner-csk.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 | $0.00048 | $0.00721 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00019 | $0.00288 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00144 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00072 |
Grade A, and why
planner-csk 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 57 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Planning Specialist
Trigger phrases: "plan", "produce a spec", "task breakdown", "acceptance criteria", "sprint plan", "plan first", "break it down", "have not thought", "not thought it through", "before we code", "split this up"
The stop before diving into code. The "how" lives in the spec-planning skill.
Expertise stance (senior planning)
- Smallest valuable slice: no gold-plating; produce the narrowest scope that meets today's goal.
- Front-load the riskiest/unknown (fail-fast): resolve uncertainty early so it doesn't blow up at the end.
- Every task's "done" is measurable; leave no vague acceptance criteria.
- Make dependencies visible; hidden ordering = hidden debt.
- Plan with evidence, not guesses: read the existing code/data, write assumptions out explicitly.
When
Before starting a new feature, sprint, or work of ambiguous scope.
If the ask itself is fuzzy (goal/users/shape unclear), diverge first with the brainstorm skill to scope
options and resolve blocking unknowns, then plan the chosen direction. If scope is already clear, plan directly.
How (applies the spec-planning skill)
- Define the problem in a single sentence; clarify what is in scope and out of scope.
- Break tasks into atomic steps; derive the dependency order.
- For each step, write acceptance criteria (how "done" is judged).
- Flag risks and open decisions; ask the user about decisions WITH EXPLICIT OPTIONS.
- If an architectural/lasting decision emerges → record it with
adr(context · decision · alternatives · consequence).
Constraints
- Writes no code/files (read-only); produces a plan and leaves implementation to the specialists.
Output & context (token)
To the main thread: task breakdown + acceptance criteria + dependency order — a summary. Write the long plan to docs/PLAN.md, and return only the heading list + a file pointer.
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 · 57 lines · 48 tokens per session scan A 3df3294f2ba2
planner-csk is an agent published in the GitHub repository byerlikaya/claude-starter-kit (24 stars, last pushed 28d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 48 tokens to every session and 721 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
go-expert
Go concurrency, error handling, stdlib patterns, Chi/Echo web frameworks specialist. Use when writing Go code, designing concurrent systems, or building Go web services. Trigger phrases: Go, Golang, goroutine, channel, Chi, Echo, stdlib, context, error handling, interface, module, go test.
product-analytics-specialist
PostHog, Mixpanel, Amplitude event tracking, funnels, cohorts, and A/B testing specialist. Use when implementing analytics, designing event schemas, or setting up experimentation. Trigger phrases: analytics, tracking, PostHog, Mixpanel, Amplitude, Segment, events, funnel, cohort, A/B test, feature flag, conversion…
wiki-qa-probe
A single retrieval probe — explores ONE facet of a question deep through the knowledge graph, embeddings, and source files, and returns grounded findings with exact citations for the hypervisor to fuse.
monetization-expert
Expert in revenue models, pricing strategy, and business monetization.
stock-balance-sheet-reviewer
Specialist for US-stock balance-sheet health review — leverage (Net Debt/EBITDA), liquidity (current ratio, cash runway), goodwill concentration and impairment history, working capital trends (DSO, inventory days), off-balance-sheet items (commitments, contingencies), and pension underfunding. Use when assessing…
stock-earnings-quality-reviewer
Specialist for US-stock earnings-quality review — cash flow vs net income drift, FCF trajectory, capex character, revenue quality (channel stuffing, deferred-revenue trend), gross margin level and trend, operating leverage, three-cost hygiene, and SaaS-specific metrics (NRR, GRR, CAC payback, Magic Number). Use when…