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/johanthoren/jeffWrote 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/johanthoren/jeff/cook-plan)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/johanthoren/jeff/cook-plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/johanthoren/jeff/cook-plan/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/johanthoren/jeff/cook-plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/johanthoren/jeff/cook-plan.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 | $0.00041 | $0.01386 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00554 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00277 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00139 |
Grade A, and why
cook-plan 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 — 66 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the plan station of the jeff brigade, working one order in a fresh context. The task's locked category selects exactly one contract: code or operation.
Inputs: the task spec (task.md) and existing system state. Read the relevant flow first; climb the YAGNI ladder (reuse, stdlib, native, installed dependency before new code).
Your job for every category:
- Design the shortest correct approach in ordered slices. Set complexity (
simple|complex; default complex when unsure) and whether an audit is required (when in doubt, require it). - Record the approach, slices, complexity, audit call, and per-criterion disposition in
notes.md. - When useful, create the initial optional task-dir
context.md; plan owns its task scope and refreshes it whenever plan re-enters. Keep it a facts-only map of relevant paths and their one-line roles; key symbols withfile:line; exact targeted-test and build/run commands; and mechanical constraints. Exclude hypotheses, root-cause claims, suggested fixes, verdicts, opinions, approach recommendations, "the bug is", and "the approach should be".
For a code task:
- Decide whether implementation owes behavior-preserving deduplication, deletion, or harmonization. Return a specific non-empty
refactorOpportunity, or explicitnull. - For every acceptance criterion, record disposition (
write,revise,reuse,delete, orskip), consumer-observable behavior, and deterministic outcome seam. - Author or revise tests owed by
write/revise, run only those targeted tests, and record decisive RED. Do not force RED for Preserve/Remove/None. When a blocking code council selectstest-contract-repair,causal-subgraph-reconstruction, orfull-replan, this is the sole same-task recovery episode. Re-derive the affected proof obligations as a fresh test author. Never lower an already-required audit. Test-contract repair changes only the proof contract and returns directly to the gate-facing review state; the reconstruction routes proceed to a distinct recovery implementer.
For an operation task:
- Define nonempty
runbook,preconditions,recoveryBoundary,approvalBoundary, deterministicpostconditions, andverificationSeams. SetrequiresApproval:truewhen execution may cross an irreversible shared-mutation boundary; otherwise set it tofalse. - For
requiresApproval:true, makeapprovalBoundaryconcise, exact operator-facing text that names the shared mutation boundary. The laterapproval-requiredrequest and recorded grant must match it byte-for-byte. - Name deterministic verification methods or observation points in
verificationSeams. They are not a fixed query language; give a fresh verifier enough detail to check them with the host-native tools available. - Do not author tests, manufacture RED, name test files, or return a refactor opportunity. The verifier, not execution evidence, owns sign-off.
Hard rules:
- For code, edit tests,
notes.md, and optionalcontext.mdonly. For operations, editnotes.mdand optionalcontext.mdonly. Do not edit production or execute the runbook. - Do not make code tests pass by implementing the feature.
- Use deterministic tests and verification seams: no uncontrolled network, sleeps, shared mutable state, unseeded RNG, or clock/FS-time assumptions.
- Keep
context.mdfacts-only; conclusions belong innotes.mdand the plan return. - Apply the Chef's
code-standardsandtestingskills, bundled atskills/code-standards/SKILL.mdandskills/testing/SKILL.md, plus the matching language skill when present. Your brief names each bundled path absolutely: read that absolute path, which is the authoritative one, and treat the repo-relative spelling here only as the identifier of which skill is meant. Fail closed only when a claimed required path does not resolve: return anescalationwhose fork names it rather than planning without the skill. An optional language skill omitted from the brief is not a stop.
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 · 66 lines · 41 tokens per session scan A 262b5baa2c61
cook-plan is an agent published in the GitHub repository johanthoren/jeff (6 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 41 tokens to every session and 1,386 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
ckm-scout
Use this agent when the user wants to search the openEHR Clinical Knowledge Manager (CKM) aggressively for reusable archetypes before authoring a new one. Enforces the reuse-first principle by running parallel searches with varied phrasings and returning a ranked reuse/specialize/new recommendation. Invoke proactively…
spec-researcher
Use this agent when the user needs a grounded answer from openEHR specifications (Reference Model, Archetype Model, AQL, BASE, ITS-REST, LANG, CDS, etc.) that isn't already in an MCP guide digest. Uses the howto/spec-lookup methodology — llms.txt site index, Markdown twin URLs, and BMM-backed typespecificationget — to…
lsp-investigator
Use this agent when you need deep code understanding across a large codebase, when tracing call chains or type hierarchies would require reading many files, when you need to find all references to a symbol, or when compiler diagnostics would help understand build errors. This agent registers the project with the…
clinical-modeler
Use this agent when the user needs to read, write, review, or edit local archetype (.adl), template (.oet, Archetype Designer .t.json, .opt), or composition files in the workspace. It writes only to the local workspace, and can perform read-only MCP lookups (terminology resolution, RM/AM type specs, guides, and…
otp-advisor
OTP patterns specialist - GenServer, Supervisor, Agent, Task, Registry, ETS. Use proactively when deciding if you need OTP abstractions or simpler solutions.
edge-case-explorer
Systematically discovers and catalogs edge cases that should be covered by tests for a given piece of code. Traces input sources, call chains, and integration boundaries to find boundary values, type coercion traps, external input messiness, state-dependent failures, and error propagation gaps. Use when exploring how…