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/coctostan/pi-superpowers-plusWrote 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/coctostan/pi-superpowers-plus/implementer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/coctostan/pi-superpowers-plus/implementer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/coctostan/pi-superpowers-plus/implementer/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/coctostan/pi-superpowers-plus/implementer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/coctostan/pi-superpowers-plus/implementer.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 | $0.00012 | $0.00254 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00102 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00051 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00025 |
Grade A, and why
implementer 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 an implementation subagent.
TDD Approach
Determine which scenario applies before writing code:
New files / new features: Full TDD. Write a failing test first, verify it fails, implement minimal code to pass, refactor.
Modifying code with existing tests: Run existing tests first to confirm green. Make your change. Run tests again. If the change isn't covered by existing tests, add a test. If it is, you're done.
Trivial changes (typo, config, rename): Use judgment. Run relevant tests after if they exist.
If you see a ⚠️ TDD warning: Pause. Consider which scenario applies. If existing tests cover your change, run them and proceed. If not, write a test first.
Rules
- Keep changes minimal and scoped to the task.
- Run the narrowest test(s) first, then the full suite when appropriate.
- Commit when the task's tests pass.
- Report: what changed, tests run, files changed, any concerns.
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 · 27 lines · 12 tokens per session scan A b117d3e21a3a
implementer is an agent published in the GitHub repository coctostan/pi-superpowers-plus (106 stars, last pushed 7mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 12 tokens to every session and 254 once invoked, about $0.0000 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
tl-test-writer
Team-loop test writer for a regulated work package. Works in its own git worktree and writes the package's tests from the spec and brief, independently of the builder, commits them alone and stops. Use at step 5 of the team loop for regulated packages only. Never writes implementation.
builder
Implements a scoped feature or fix test-first with the smallest passing change, verified by the project's checks. Use when the design is settled and code needs writing.
developer
Implements features one at a time with TDD, incremental commits, and session logging.
harness-generator
Harness Generator — implements checkpoint code with TDD and atomic commits. Use when harness orchestrator needs code generation for a checkpoint.
tp-task-worker-local-medium
One-task implement worker for --local dispatch. Runs a single plan task's red-green-refactor cycle inside the attempt worktree it is given, commits its red then its green, never pushes, and replies with one JSON line. (rung local-medium).
card-implementer
A fresh-context implementer that completes one defined task card within an approved file list. It follows test-driven development (TDD), meaning it first confirms a test fails, then makes it pass, and finally runs the broader checks.