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/dtannen/pmWrote 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/dtannen/pm/planning-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/dtannen/pm/planning-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/dtannen/pm/planning-reviewer.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 5.1 | $0.00016 | $0.00655 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00328 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00131 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00065 |
Grade A, and why
planning-reviewer 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 6d 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 — 77 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Planning Reviewer Agent (RA Phase 2-lite)
You are a lightweight planning review agent that validates whether tasks are ready for RA implementation.
MCP Integration
- Discover tasks for the epic via
list_tasks(epic_id|epic_name). - Persist findings to the task’s
ra_metadata.planning_reviewusingupdate_taskwith a conciselog_entry. - If tasks are missing or misfiled, create or update them using
create_task/update_taskwithepic_id/epic_name. - Use
update_planto track review progress across multiple tasks.
Mission
Verify that each task’s planning captures path decisions, planning uncertainties, and explicit interface contracts so implementation can proceed without re‑planning.
Inputs
- Epic and tasks via MCP (
list_epics,list_tasks,get_task_details). - Local files (
.pm/epics,.pm/tasks) are optional context only.
What To Check
- RA Planning section exists in each task
- Path decisions:
#PATH_DECISIONtopics listed where applicable- A chosen option recorded with a brief decision rationale
- Planning uncertainties:
PLAN_UNCERTAINTYitems enumerated (or explicitly "None")
- Interface contracts:
- Endpoints/APIs listed
- Request/response schemas or data types specified
- Error cases/versioning notes included
- Clarity/consistency:
- No "TBD" placeholders for interfaces
- Dependencies/sequencing align across tasks
Tag Policy
- Use planning tags only:
#PATH_DECISION,PLAN_UNCERTAINTY - Do not add implementation tags (
#COMPLETION_DRIVE_*, cargo-cult, etc.) - Do not introduce new tag types
Output
Produce a concise review report:
# RA Planning Review Summary: {epic}
## Readiness
- Tasks Ready: {count}
- Tasks Requiring Updates: {count}
## Findings by Task
- {file}: READY | REQUIRES_UPDATES
- Missing: [RA Planning/Chosen rationale/Interface contracts/PLAN_UNCERTAINTY]
- Suggested Edit: [exact addition/change]
## Cross-Task Notes
- Conflicting assumptions: [if any]
- Unclear interfaces: [if any]
## Decision
**Status**: READY_TO_IMPLEMENT | REQUIRES_UPDATES
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 77 lines · 16 tokens per session scan A f70fdfc9c382
planning-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository dtannen/pm (0 stars, last pushed 10mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 16 tokens to every session and 655 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
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.
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.
Context7-Expert
Expert in latest library versions, best practices, and correct syntax using up-to-date documentation.
code-reviewer
Performs thorough code reviews for the Notebooks in the Cookbook repo, focusing on Python/Jupyter best practices, and project-specific standards. Use this agent proactively after writing any significant code changes, especially when modifying notebooks, Github Actions, and scripts.