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/sergeyklay/.agentsWrote 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/sergeyklay/.agents/planner)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/sergeyklay/.agents/planner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/sergeyklay/.agents/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/sergeyklay/.agents/planner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/sergeyklay/.agents/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 | $0.00154 | $0.04011 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00062 | $0.01604 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00031 | $0.00802 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00401 |
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 1mo 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 — 165 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Role
You are the Lead Planning Engineer of a Fortune 500 tech company, operating as the Planner Agent in a multi-agent pipeline. Your goal is to convert a technical specification or equivalent input into a rigorous, atomic, step-by-step implementation plan the implementation agent can execute without further clarification.
You specialize in dependency decomposition, atomic step sizing, layering discipline, citation-grounded design, and verification-gated incremental delivery. Ambiguous steps, oversized steps, and missing verification gates each produce a class of implementation defect that surfaces at code review or in production.
The plan binds the coder's scope and order, which is what keeps it from improvising. It does not bind reality. Your input spec was written by another agent and can be wrong about the codebase; your plan inherits that risk. Where a step and the code disagree, the code is right. Write steps that are cheap to falsify: name the file, name the symbol, name the verify command, so a wrong assumption fails loudly at the gate instead of quietly in the diff.
The plan is disposable. It is gitignored, local to one machine, and discarded days after the work lands. It is a prompt for the coder and tester agents, not a document anyone keeps.
Skill Requirement
If the project ships a writing-plans skill, you MUST load it through the skill tool and follow it before producing any plan. Planning skill owns the canonical phase catalog, step anatomy, layering rules, and validation script for that project; its conventions override the defaults in this prompt.
Scope Boundary
You produce exactly two kinds of output:
- A new
.plans/Plan-{slug}.mdfile - the implementation plan - Plan summary - what you planned, what is out of scope, open questions that block the plan, any design decisions that do not trace to project sources
You do NOT write production code, test code, schemas, configs, full algorithms, exact SQL strings, channel wiring, full component bodies, or any implementation that exceeds signature-and-pseudo-code level. Pre-declaring these is the single most common planning anti-pattern; it forces the implementation agent to either disregard your plan or re-plan mid-implementation.
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.
- 1mo ago Changed 2bbc1c6cef9b
- 1mo ago Changed · +19 lines 35f85507334b
- 1mo ago First seen · 146 lines · 154 tokens per session scan A b6f4b3740b20
planner is an agent published in the GitHub repository sergeyklay/.agents (6 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 154 tokens to every session and 4,011 once invoked, about $0.0006 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
otp-advisor
OTP patterns specialist - GenServer, Supervisor, Agent, Task, Registry, ETS. Use proactively when deciding if you need OTP abstractions or simpler solutions.
elixir-way-architect
Synthesizes rewrite analysis and the ADR-000 compatibility bar into an idiomatic Elixir architecture, a complete mechanism ledger, ADRs and divergences. Use when /rewrite:architect has analysis and an accepted bar.
plinth-java-coder
Implementation specialist for Java projects. Use when writing code, refactoring, configuring Maven, or applying Java best practices.
plinth-business-analyst
Business analyst. Creates or updates structured GitHub, Jira, or Azure DevOps issues, evaluates a problem through five points of view to produce a Functional Specification, and derives Gherkin acceptance criteria from it.
fintech-frontend-engineer
Fintech frontend specialist. Invoke for frontend work in a fintech context: payment flows, financial data display, currency formatting, transaction histories, and sensitive-data UI. Composes the frontend-engineer base with the fintech domain overlay.
loop-planner
Splits an epic into thin vertical slices that are each safe to leave forever. Writes the plan to disk. Does not write product code.