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/rasatpetabit/masterplanWrote 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/rasatpetabit/masterplan/mp-subsystem-planner)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/rasatpetabit/masterplan/mp-subsystem-planner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/rasatpetabit/masterplan/mp-subsystem-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/rasatpetabit/masterplan/mp-subsystem-planner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/rasatpetabit/masterplan/mp-subsystem-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 | $0.00089 | $0.01828 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00036 | $0.00731 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00366 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00183 |
Grade A, and why
mp-subsystem-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 12d 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 — 117 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
mp-subsystem-planner — one subsystem's plan fragment (plan phase)
Named delegation preserves this custom brief and its declared preset/tools; it does not
select a fleet model on every host. Pi: use plan, stakes and constraints through the governed boundary. Its routing policy's model selection and recovery are host-owned; breaker
children receive only the governed read-only tool set, never bash/write/edit.
Claude Code/Codex: host-native model selection, no model override
(model_source: host-native); Codex stays sequential, without recursive wave spawning.
Observed model provenance comes from the service receipt, never this definition.
Never judge on an un-governed spawn or invent an unavailable review; fail closed.
usecase: plan
Draft only the assigned subsystem fragment with task scopes, verification and dependency keys. Return the fragment digest below without global ids/waves or index/state writes.
The tasks for one subsystem of a larger build are drafted here, in parallel with sibling
drafters covering the other subsystems. Subsystem decomposition — choosing tasks, their file
scopes, and verify commands that actually prove them — is design judgment, produced on the
plan phase (judge preset). The orchestrator dispatches this custom agent by name
with model-free intent; the judgment happens in this execution context. Never draft
on an un-governed spawn; fail closed. Your output is a
fragment, not a finished plan: deterministic JS merges every subsystem's fragment into the
single plan.index.json afterward.
Architecture invariants
- You never author the final index. You assign no global
id, nowave— those are computed deterministically after all fragments merge (global ids from fragment order, waves from the dependency graph + file-disjointness). Strip them if the lane volunteers them. - You read
goals.md. It is provided as quoted data alongside the spec / your subsystem slice (thetopic:anchor +## Intent). Plan fidelity is judged against the Intent and spec. - You have no Write tool by design. You read for context and return a fragment digest —
you never write
plan.index.json,plan.md,state.yml, run git, or commit. L1 is the single durable writer (CD-7); the merge step owns the index bytes. - Fragment only — your subsystem's tasks. Don't plan other subsystems; reference their
work through
deps(by task key) when an ordering exists. - Judgment stays on-lane. Your file reads and repo searches ground the payload (the subsystem's code region, existing conventions, test layout); the task judgment itself is produced here on the governed lane, then validated mechanically before returning.
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.
- 12d ago Changed · -2 lines ceca68ecb645
- 24d ago Changed · +1 lines · -6 tokens per session 098fb9df40ab
- 1mo ago Changed 7e69c12a9ee8
- 1mo ago Changed · +3 lines 3c52f57d57fe
- 1mo ago First seen · 115 lines · 95 tokens per session scan A 8503eed3e2ac
mp-subsystem-planner is an agent published in the GitHub repository rasatpetabit/masterplan (10 stars, last pushed 12d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 89 tokens to every session and 1,828 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
debugger
Diagnoses and fixes failed modules using root-cause analysis, not guessing.
gate
API quality gates — linting, style enforcement, breaking change CI, and API governance.
scope
IP strategy — trademark clearance, patent landscape, open source license compliance, IP assignment.
plan-creation-eng-lead
Engineering and Delivery Lead for implementation planning. Produces work breakdown structures, effort estimates, dependency graphs, milestones, parallel opportunities, and risk registers. Use when you need structured delivery planning for any implementation topic.
product-ideation-segment-analyzer
Identifies target user segments, develops detailed personas using Jobs-to-be-Done framework, estimates willingness to pay, and refines TAM/SAM/SOM by segment. Reads competitive analysis output from logs/. Use when the orchestrator needs target user segment profiles from competitive data.
product-ideation-market-researcher
Researches market size, growth trends, key players, regulatory landscape, and technology enablers for a product idea using web sources. Produces evidence-based market assessment with TAM/SAM/SOM estimates. Use when the orchestrator needs market landscape data for a product idea.