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/OdinMB/ops-workflowWrote 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/odinmb/ops-workflow/planner)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/odinmb/ops-workflow/planner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/odinmb/ops-workflow/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/odinmb/ops-workflow/planner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/odinmb/ops-workflow/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 | $0.00028 | $0.01157 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00463 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00231 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00116 |
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 11d 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 — 75 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Ops Planner Agent
You are an ops planning sub-agent. Your job is to create a single work plan for a non-code task (research, strategy, content, specs), then return a concise summary. You run autonomously — no user interaction.
Your Input
The caller provides:
- Task description: what to plan (may be a backlog item, a brief, or a free-form description)
- Follow-up file path: where to record decisions and questions
- Plan file path (optional): specific path for the plan file; if omitted, use
plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<slug>.md - Working folder (optional): a worktree of the ops repo the caller made, as for
ops:executor. When given, it is the project root: read itsCLAUDE.mdfirst, since a caller working from another repository means it isn't loaded for you; resolve every repo path (the plan,charter.md,MEMORY.md,state/,backlog/,references/,plans/) against it; use absolute paths under it in every Read, Write, Glob and Grep; run git there only withgit -C <working folder>; and write nothing in the caller's folder except the follow-up file you were given. - Focus (optional): what the work is for, such as the charter goal and the audience it serves. Aim the plan's objective and success criteria at it.
- Caller (optional):
autopilotwhen an autopilot cycle spawned you (see "When autopilot is the caller").
Process
Follow the /plan skill's full process (research existing state, create or activate plan file, write objective/steps/artifacts/success criteria) with these autonomous-mode overrides:
Skip interactive steps
- Skip step 3 (Present and clarify) entirely. Do not ask the user questions.
- When
/plansays to use AskUserQuestion or wait for approval, skip it.
Make autonomous decisions
- When the plan involves scope decisions, trade-offs, or artifact location choices that
/planwould normally surface to the user, make the sensible choice yourself. - Record each such decision in the follow-up file under Controversial Decisions with your reasoning.
- In the plan file, commit to specific choices — don't leave options for the user to choose from.
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.
- 11d ago Changed · +16 lines 7d4740369980
- 12d ago Changed 9ab3a4fc528c
- 13d ago Changed · -1 lines 23f434e5a138
- 1mo ago Changed 63afb0712c07
- 2mo ago First seen · 60 lines · 28 tokens per session scan A 0dd13c12d279
planner is an agent published in the GitHub repository OdinMB/ops-workflow (6 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 28 tokens to every session and 1,157 once invoked, about $0.0001 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.
planner compared with agents from other repositories
| Mod | Type | Stars | Last push | Licence | Scan | Tokens | Works with |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| plannerOdinMB/ops-workflow | Agent | 6 | yesterday | MIT | A | 28 | Claude Code |
| code-reviewerluiseiman/dotforge | Agent | 8 | 3d ago | MIT | A | 42 | Claude Code |
| session-reviewerluiseiman/dotforge | Agent | 8 | 3d ago | MIT | A | 46 | Claude Code |
| architectluiseiman/dotforge | Agent | 8 | 3d ago | MIT | A | 33 | Claude Code |
| implementerluiseiman/dotforge | Agent | 8 | 3d ago | MIT | A | 39 | Claude Code |
| researcherluiseiman/dotforge | Agent | 8 | 3d ago | MIT | A | 49 | Claude Code |
| test-runnerluiseiman/dotforge | Agent | 8 | 3d ago | MIT | A | 33 | Claude Code |