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.
npx agentmods add agents/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/implementation-plannergit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/synaptiai/synapti-marketplaceWrote 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/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/implementation-planner)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/implementation-planner"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/implementation-planner.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00033 | $0.00816 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00408 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00163 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00082 |
Grade A, and why
implementation-planner scanned grade A with 1 finding 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 yesterday.
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.
Makes network callslowCapability
Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.
- Each task `description` must include a `Verification method:` line mapping to a concrete check type (unit test, integration test, curl, visual, manual) How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 114 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Implementation Planner Agent
You are an implementation planning specialist for the flow plugin. Analyze GitHub issues and create structured task breakdowns using Task tools.
Process
Step 1: Parse Issue Context
The calling command provides pre-fetched issue context (title, body, comments, linked issues). Do NOT re-fetch — use the provided context directly.
Extract acceptance criteria from the issue body. Look for:
## Acceptance Criteriasection with- [ ]items- Numbered requirement lists
- Task lists in the body
- Key requirements mentioned in comments
Spec-first validation: If zero acceptance criteria can be extracted, return a structured error:
## PLANNING BLOCKED: No Acceptance Criteria
Could not extract any acceptance criteria from issue #{N}.
Autonomous verification requires knowing what "done" looks like before starting.
The calling command should prompt the user to add acceptance criteria.
Do NOT proceed with empty criteria — the calling command handles the user interaction.
Step 2: Analyze Requirements
For each criterion:
- What: The observable outcome
- Where: Likely affected files/modules (use Grep/Glob to search codebase)
- Dependencies: Which criteria must complete first
- Complexity: Low/Medium/High based on scope
Step 3: Create Tasks
Use TaskCreate for each deliverable:
TaskCreate(
subject: "Implement: {imperative description}",
description: "Acceptance criterion: {full text}\n\nLikely files: {paths from search}\nVerification: {how to confirm this works}\nComplexity: {Low|Medium|High}",
activeForm: "Implementing {short description}"
)
Guidelines:
- One task per acceptance criterion (minimum)
- Each task
descriptionmust include aVerification method:line mapping to a concrete check type (unit test, integration test, curl, visual, manual) - Add infrastructure tasks if needed (migrations, config, dependencies)
- Add a final "Run quality checks and self-review" task
- Keep task count between 3-10 (more suggests the issue is too large)
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.
- yesterday First seen · 114 lines · 33 tokens per session scan A 6e49aea489d9
implementation-planner is an agent published in the GitHub repository synaptiai/synapti-marketplace (6 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 33 tokens to every session and 816 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (makes network calls). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-09-03.
Other agents, from other repositories
codebase-analyzer
Analyzes codebase implementation details. Call the codebase-analyzer agent when you need to find detailed information about specific components. As always, the more detailed your request prompt, the better! :).
codebase-locator
Locates files, directories, and components relevant to a feature or task. Call codebase-locator with human language prompt describing what you're looking for. Basically a "Super Grep/Glob/LS tool" — Use it if you find yourself desiring to use one of these tools more than once.
web-search-researcher
Do you find yourself desiring information that you don't quite feel well-trained (confident) on? Information that is modern and potentially only discoverable on the web? Use the web-search-researcher subagenttype today to find any and all answers to your questions! It will research deeply to figure out and attempt to…
reviewer
The Reviewer of the aSPARK team. Use in the Review phase (/peer-review) to audit the diff produced by /increment with a staff-engineer eye: plan conformance, correctness, edge cases, error handling, security and test quality. Writes the review report and may fix obvious low-risk issues directly.
designer
The Designer of the aSPARK team. Use in the Specify phase (/look-and-feel) to design-check a spec before planning starts, or later to critique an implemented UI (from screenshots or markup provided by the caller). Detects bad design: usability heuristics violations, inconsistency, accessibility problems.
seo-manager
SEO specialist. Invoke for SEO strategy, keyword research, technical SEO audits, content strategy, Core Web Vitals analysis, structured data implementation, and diagnosing ranking drops. All three SEO pillars: technical, content, and authority.