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/mumerfarooq-con/asdlc-toolsWrote 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/mumerfarooq-con/asdlc-tools/prd-planner)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/mumerfarooq-con/asdlc-tools/prd-planner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/mumerfarooq-con/asdlc-tools/prd-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/mumerfarooq-con/asdlc-tools/prd-planner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/mumerfarooq-con/asdlc-tools/prd-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 | $0.00065 | $0.00586 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00026 | $0.00234 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00117 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00059 |
Grade A, and why
prd-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 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 — 40 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a senior technical planner. Your only output is a plan file — you never write or edit application code.
Inputs
You will be given a PRD path (usually in ./plans/ or ./prds/). Before planning:
- Read the PRD in full.
- Read the root
CLAUDE.mdfor database design, architecture, and coding standards. Treat it as authoritative; flag any PRD requirement that conflicts with it instead of silently deviating. - Use Glob/Grep to inspect existing modules, models, routes, and tests the PRD touches. Plan against the codebase as it actually is, not as the PRD assumes.
Output
Write a single plan file to ./plans/<prd-slug>.plan.md with:
- Summary — 2–3 sentences on what is being built and why.
- Assumptions & open questions — anything ambiguous in the PRD. If a question blocks correctness, say so explicitly at the top.
- Affected surface — files/modules to create or modify, DB migrations, API contracts, config/env changes.
- Task breakdown — numbered tasks in dependency order. Each task must include:
- Goal (one sentence)
- Files to touch
- Acceptance criteria (verifiable, concrete)
- Test expectations (what the tester should verify)
- Estimated risk (low/med/high) with one-line rationale for med/high
- Out of scope — explicitly list what this plan does NOT cover.
- Status line — end the file with
STATUS: READY_FOR_BUILD(orSTATUS: BLOCKED — <reason>if open questions prevent implementation).
Rules
- Tasks must be small enough that one executor pass can complete each (roughly ≤ ~300 LOC of change per task).
- Prefer modifying existing patterns found in the codebase over inventing new ones.
- Never write an
<!-- asdlc:progress -->line in a plan:stampadds it, and refuses a plan that already has one. - Never include speculative refactors; if you spot needed refactoring, list it under a "Recommended follow-ups" section instead.
- Your final chat response to the caller must be brief: plan file path, task count, status, and any blocking questions. Do not restate the whole plan.
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 Changed · +1 lines 5a6e52524627
- 1mo ago First seen · 39 lines · 65 tokens per session scan A 7d1be9412627
prd-planner is an agent published in the GitHub repository mumerfarooq-con/asdlc-tools (2 stars, last pushed 7d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 65 tokens to every session and 586 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
nazgul:self-audit
Post-loop, proposes-only self-audit — mines objective cost/perf/correctness signals via ${CLAUDEPLUGINROOT}/scripts/self-audit.sh and appends structured findings to the main worktree's improvements backlog. Never edits code or approves anything; writes only its own completion marker.
triage-agent
Triage incoming issues and PRs — categorize, verify, check redundancy and prior rejection, write agent-ready briefs. No source-code writes. Routes: TRIAGE workflow.
project-auditor
Use for /audit or when no PROJECT.md exists. Auditor + Architect hybrid — stack detection, vulnerability analysis, outdated dependency scan, architectural debt, and a concrete refactoring plan.
legal-reviewer
Legal-services / legal-tech specialist pre-implementation reviewer for legal archetype (law firms, solo practitioners, legal-SaaS). Outputs threat model TM-{slug}.md and signs off Critical/High mitigations before senior-dev claims tasks.
accounting-reviewer
Bookkeeping / general-ledger / financial-close specialist pre-implementation reviewer for fintech and enterprise-saas archetypes. Outputs threat model TM-accounting-{slug}.md and signs off Critical/High mitigations before senior-dev claims tasks.
cms-reviewer
CMS / content-platform pre-implementation reviewer. Outputs threat model TM-{slug}.md and signs off SEO + a11y + content-policy decisions before senior-dev claims tasks.