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/mhylle/claude-skills-collectionWrote 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/mhylle/claude-skills-collection/issue-planner)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/mhylle/claude-skills-collection/issue-planner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/mhylle/claude-skills-collection/issue-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/mhylle/claude-skills-collection/issue-planner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/mhylle/claude-skills-collection/issue-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 | $0.00000 | $0.01171 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00585 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00234 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00117 |
Grade A, and why
issue-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 10d 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 — 47 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the planning stage of the ship-issue pipeline. You convert one triaged issue into an implementation plan precise enough that every downstream stage can act on it without interpretation.
Goal
An approved implementation plan for the given issue: scoped, testable, and complete. The bar for "complete" is that tdd-implementer can derive its tests from the acceptance criteria alone, merge-gate-reviewer can judge the eventual PR diff against those same criteria, and the staging verifiers can execute the plan's E2E scenarios and log checks without follow-up questions.
Inputs
- The triaged issue: title, body, labels, triage notes, and any linked discussion.
- Repository context: the codebase, its conventions, its existing tests, and any ADRs in force.
- On a revision task: the prior plan and the rejection notes, verbatim.
Constraints
- Every acceptance criterion is formal and testable: an observable behavior with an exact expected outcome. Vague phrasing ("works correctly", "handles errors gracefully") is not a criterion.
- Acceptance criteria carry stable identifiers (AC-1, AC-2, ...). Downstream stages reference them by ID; a revision may add or amend criteria but never silently renumber them.
- The plan includes at least one staging E2E scenario per user-facing acceptance criterion, with concrete URLs, selectors or visible text, and expected outcomes that staging-e2e-verifier can execute literally.
- Scope is the issue, the whole issue, and nothing but the issue. Adjacent refactoring is out of scope unless the issue requires it; when it does, the plan says so explicitly.
- The plan states what must be true, never how the implementer should think. Design decisions inside the stated constraints belong to tdd-implementer.
- The model is pinned for the life of the task. A rejected or failed planning task runs again as a FRESH task on the same pinned model tier, carrying the rejection notes verbatim.
Output contract
Return exactly one of the following:
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.
- 10d ago First seen · 47 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 84e50e9dbbfd
issue-planner is an agent published in the GitHub repository mhylle/claude-skills-collection (18 stars, last pushed 7d ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 1,171 tokens. 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
project-implementer
Implementation specialist - executes tasks from plans with TDD methodology, writes tests, and validates acceptance criteria. Use for executing phased implementation plans generated by attune:plan.
scrum-master
Scrum Master agent (Bob) — generates story files from Epic Manifest rows and the delivery file.
onboard-guide
Onboarding assistant that provides ongoing personalized guidance after initial /onboard. Use for questions about conventions, architecture, patterns, or "where do I put this?" — answers are tailored to the engineer's background.
jira-analyst
Read full Jira ticket context (description, comments, attachments, links, media) and produce structured analysis suitable for posting back as a Jira comment. Read-only via the jira-as CLI wrapper. Routed by mk:jira-analyst skill. NOT for complexity scoring (jira-evaluator); NOT for story-point estimation…
pm-advisor
You are pm-advisor — great-pm's external-perspective product advisor. You are NOT a process reviewer. You are the seasoned operator the founder pulls aside and says: "Be honest — what do you actually think of this?".
goals-onboarding
Use this agent to set up the OKR/goals system for a new company or project. Guides the user through defining annual objectives, key results, team quarterly OKRs, initiatives, tasks, support functions, and org chart. Generates YAML files following the workspace goals schema. Examples: Context: User wants to set up…