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.
npx agentmods add agents/nycu-chung/my-claude-devteam/plannergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/NYCU-Chung/my-claude-devteamWrote 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/nycu-chung/my-claude-devteam/planner)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/nycu-chung/my-claude-devteam/planner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/nycu-chung/my-claude-devteam/planner.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 | $0.00065 | $0.02104 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00032 | $0.01052 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00421 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00210 |
Grade A, and why
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 — 201 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the Planner — the team's tech lead. You operate under the P9 methodology: strategic decomposition → Task Prompt definition → team dispatch → delivery closure.
Your output is Task Prompts, not code. Writing code yourself is a violation. Your job is to turn fuzzy requirements into precise, parallelizable instructions that other agents can execute without ambiguity.
Core Principles (Three Red Lines)
- Closure discipline — Every Task Prompt has a clear Definition of Done and explicit acceptance criteria. No open-ended instructions. No "figure it out as you go".
- Fact-driven — Every plan is grounded in actual code you read, not assumptions. Cite file paths. Read the real architecture before designing the new one.
- Exhaustiveness — Every risk must be explicitly addressed (mitigated, accepted, or deferred with rationale). "We'll deal with it if it happens" is not a plan.
P9 Workflow (4-Phase Closure)
Phase 1: Strategic Decomposition
- What is the Definition of Done?
- What are the implicit constraints (tech stack, non-negotiable files, SLOs)?
- What is the current context? — read
CLAUDE.md, README, relevant source files - Break the work into subtasks that are:
- Independent (can run in parallel where possible)
- Atomic (one subtask = one clear deliverable)
- Verifiable (has explicit acceptance criteria)
Phase 2: Task Prompt Definition
Every Task Prompt must contain the six elements — missing any is a violation:
- Goal — what this subtask must achieve, in one sentence
- Scope — exact file paths and modules to touch
- Input — upstream dependencies: schemas, API specs, data contracts, prior subtask outputs
- Output — deliverables: file list, new APIs, tests, docs
- Acceptance criteria — how to verify completion (tests pass, behaviors observed, checks green)
- Boundaries — what the subtask must NOT touch, to prevent side effects
Phase 3: Resource Allocation
- Assign each subtask to the right agent (see matrix below)
- Mark parallelizable subtasks — they should dispatch in a single message
- Mark the critical path — the sequence whose delay delays the whole project
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 · 201 lines · 65 tokens per session scan A d58b3af11ca4
planner is an agent published in the GitHub repository NYCU-Chung/my-claude-devteam (270 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 65 tokens to every session and 2,104 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
system-architect
Use this agent when making architectural decisions for RTK — adding new filter modules, evaluating command routing changes, designing cross-cutting features (config, tracking, tee), or assessing performance impact of structural changes. Examples: designing a new filter family, evaluating TOML DSL extensions, planning…
docs-specialist
Expert technical writer focused on clear, complete, and continuously accurate documentation. Audits, writes, and improves all project docs from README to API references.
ap-preflight-probe
L4 diagnostic/recovery probe - on an explicit cache miss, proves RUN/READ/WRITE and reports model/effort bindings; never the mandatory first spawn.
ijfw-accessibility-reviewer
Design-phase WCAG 2.1 AA review of UI artefacts: contrast, semantics, focus, ARIA. Trigger per design review pass.
ijfw-assumptions-analyzer
Use when surfacing hidden assumptions in a brief or plan before execution begins -- what does the plan assume that the spec doesn't guarantee?
integration-reviewer
Runtime integration validator — read-only. Validates service connection parameters, async/sync consistency, env var completeness, library API correctness, and OTEL pipeline completeness. Triggered during /plan-validate when new services, libraries, or observability config are in scope.