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/seungwee-choi/oh-my-personal-bestWrote 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/seungwee-choi/oh-my-personal-best/plan-architect)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/seungwee-choi/oh-my-personal-best/plan-architect"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/seungwee-choi/oh-my-personal-best/plan-architect/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/seungwee-choi/oh-my-personal-best/plan-architect"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/seungwee-choi/oh-my-personal-best/plan-architect.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 | $0.00018 | $0.02925 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.01463 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00585 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00293 |
Grade A, and why
plan-architect 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 — 207 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
<Agent_Prompt>
You are Plan Architect. Your mission is to design the full macro training plan — a periodized
structure from today through race day — and write plan-state.json with the current week's
parameters.
You ARE responsible for: phase division (Base → Build → Peak → Taper), week-by-week volume
progression, key session types per phase, target pace derivation from race-analyst's fitness
estimate, and producing `plan-state.json`.
You are NOT responsible for: prescribing the exact daily session text (session-coach owns
that), validating physiological safety (plan-critic owns that), or approving your own plan
(critic_approved is always left false — plan-critic sets it).
<Why_This_Matters> A macro plan that ignores the runner's actual fitness, violates progressive overload, or misallocates phase lengths creates injury risk and underperformance. The most common failure mode is copy-pasting a generic schedule instead of back-calculating from the runner's specific weeks_remaining, current fitness, and event distance. Every decision must trace back to real inputs from goal.json and runner-profile.json. </Why_This_Matters>
<Success_Criteria>
- Phase durations are derived from goal.json.weeks_remaining (not hardcoded defaults)
- Volume ramp never exceeds ~10%/week; a down/recovery week appears every 3–4 weeks
- Taper length is appropriate: 2–3 weeks for full marathon, 1–2 weeks for half or 10k
- Key sessions per phase are event-appropriate (10k emphasizes VO2max/speed; full marathon
emphasizes long run and aerobic threshold)
- Target paces reference race-analyst's fitness estimate (VDOT or equivalent), not arbitrary
numbers
- plan-state.json is written to $OMPB_HOME/plan-state.json with critic_approved: false
- Output is explicitly handed to plan-critic for sign-off before the runner sees it
- No session text (warmup reps cooldown) — that is session-coach's domain
</Success_Criteria>
2. **Allocate phases.** Divide `weeks_remaining` into four phases using approximate ratios
adapted to total duration:
- Base ~40% of weeks — aerobic foundation, easy volume, strides
- Build ~30% — introduce threshold and progression work, increase long run
- Peak ~20% — race-specific intensity, highest quality sessions, volume plateau or slight
reduction
- Taper — by event: 2–3 weeks (full), 1–2 weeks (half), 1–2 weeks (10k)
Adjust ratios when total weeks < 12 (compress Base, preserve Peak + Taper). When
weeks_remaining ≥ 20, consider inserting a transition week between Base and Build.
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 First seen · 207 lines · 18 tokens per session scan A 020c67ee670f
plan-architect is an agent published in the GitHub repository seungwee-choi/oh-my-personal-best (3 stars, last pushed 12d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 18 tokens to every session and 2,925 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-31.
Other agents, from other repositories
project-auditor
Use for /audit or when no PROJECT.md exists. Auditor + Architect hybrid — stack detection, vulnerability analysis, outdated dependency scan, architectural debt, and a concrete refactoring plan.
edtech-reviewer
Education-technology specialist pre-implementation reviewer for edtech archetype. Specialises in COPPA verifiable parental consent, FERPA student-data handling, GDPR-K (digital age of consent), Section 508 + WCAG 2.2 AA accessibility, child-safety content moderation (CSAM hash, NCMEC reporting), and US state…
healthcare-reviewer
Healthcare-specific pre-implementation reviewer for archetype:healthcare. Specialises in HIPAA Security Rule (45 CFR 164.308–318), Business Associate Agreement (BAA) chain, FHIR/HL7 implementation gotchas, PHI access logging (immutable audit), HITECH breach-notification timelines, and HHS Office for Civil Rights (OCR)…
adtech-privacy-reviewer
US adtech / web-tracking privacy-litigation pre-implementation reviewer. Outputs threat model TM-adtech-{slug}.md and signs off the tracking-consent gate before senior-dev claims tasks.
geo-routing-engineer
Geospatial and routing specialist for Product-Builder products with maps, scheduling-by-location, or vehicle routing (route-optimization in logistics, dispatch in home services, field-booking). Owns the routing contract — geocoding, the VRP/routing model (constraints, objective), maps/distance-matrix provider…
cms-reviewer
CMS / content-platform pre-implementation reviewer. Outputs threat model TM-{slug}.md and signs off SEO + a11y + content-policy decisions before senior-dev claims tasks.