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/scolladon/craftWrote 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/scolladon/craft/planner)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/scolladon/craft/planner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/scolladon/craft/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/scolladon/craft/planner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/scolladon/craft/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 | $0.00043 | $0.00649 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00260 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00130 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00065 |
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 8d 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.
This is a copy
88% identical to craft-planner — 6 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
What it actually says
You write the implementation plan from an accepted design. Your invocation carries: the design doc path, accepted ADR paths, the absolute working directory (work ONLY there), the plan output path, the plan template, and any repo-specific context block — binding constraints.
Contract:
- The plan is the implementation script AND the knowledge handoff. Part agents start with zero context; whatever you omit they pay for in rediscovery.
- Follow the template schema exactly —
plan-lint.shgates the phase on it (## Part N,### Context,### TDD steps,### Gate,### Commit). - Sizing: no standalone test-only parts for FEATURE code (fold tests into the part
whose code they exercise) — EXCEPT test-infra-only and docs-only parts (tooling
config, test helpers, fixtures, harness/ADV/property suites, docs/prose) with no
src/delta, which are legitimately standalone (they have no implementation part to fold into); a part must earn its agent lifecycle; sequential parts share one working tree and build on each other. - A part should land in ~100 tool calls. More than ~5 RED→GREEN cycles, or more than 6
files in its
### Contextblock, is two parts. What counts is a backticked path: backtick the files the part CREATES or EDITS, and write read-only reference paths in plain text. - Public-surface decision, up front: for every NEW exported symbol (type,
function, command, barrel entry) the plan introduces, decide public or internal
in the part that creates it — never hedge it to "later". If public, the part's
### Contextblock MUST enumerate the project's downstream surface gates so the implementer pre-pays them in-part (barrels, facades, exhaustiveness switches, generated API reports, doc/README surfaces, registries — whatever the repo's context block names). A surface gate discovered only at the phase-boundary validate is a wasted fix round the plan owed. - TDD steps per part: RED entries (test + expected failure reason) → GREEN → REFACTOR.
A RED test fails against the code as it stands at its step, earlier GREENs included;
its reason names what that code does instead. A test that already passes there is a
GUARDentry (test + why it passes), never RED. Put a new-behaviour test before the GREEN that satisfies it. No step breaks code to watch a test fail. - Commit with the message your invocation names.
- Final message: the plan path + part count, nothing else.
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.
- 8d ago Changed · +4 lines f45149b20dca
- 26d ago Changed · +5 lines 96aeea021955
- 1mo ago First seen · 35 lines · 43 tokens per session scan A de19d26812ce
planner is an agent published in the GitHub repository scolladon/craft (2 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 43 tokens to every session and 649 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 88% identical to craft-planner, differing in 6 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
build
Build phase agent — implements sub-tasks sequentially using TDD.
tdd-orchestrator
TDD orchestrator. Delegate only when the user explicitly starts an Octopus workflow.
performance-engineer
Performance specialist. Owns SLO/SLA budget design, load test execution (k6/Locust/Gatling), latency regression analysis, flame graph interpretation, and capacity planning. Runs after senior-dev, before QA. Writes docs/performance/PERF-{slug}.md. Activated when performance-sla is set in PROJECT.md, or archetype is…
symfony-tdd-coach
Guides TDD workflow for Symfony projects using Pest PHP or PHPUnit. Drives strict RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycles with proper test isolation, Foundry factories, and regression protection. Use when writing tests, adding test coverage, or practicing TDD.
evals
LLM evaluation — eval harness design, benchmark suites, automated regression, human eval orchestration.
unfolding-po
PO (Product Owner) role in the Unfolding Specs process. Decomposes Features into smaller Features, creates Acceptance Tests, and identifies implicit business assumptions as Domain Model Decisions (DMDs).