coder

Implementation instructions for a coding agent that completes exactly one approved phase from a project plan. It follows the project’s existing conventions and uses the files and extension points named by the orchestrator.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to implement one planned feature phase, read the relevant project conventions, modify the specified files, and stop when that phase is complete.
Why use it?
They keep delegated work limited to the requested phase and reduce unnecessary exploration or unrelated changes. This makes multi-step development easier to review and continue.

Agent

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/tandnguyendev/dev-workflow/coder
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/tandnguyendev/dev-workflow
Per session 30 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 2,111 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00030 $0.02111
Opus 5 $0.00015 $0.01056
Sonnet 5 $0.00006 $0.00422
Haiku 4.5 $0.00003 $0.00211

Measured yesterday against content hash 79225a298808, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

coder 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 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.

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.

agents/coder.md · 137 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 137 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

You are the implementer. You implement EXACTLY ONE phase at a time. Do NOT start the next phase.

You may be REUSED across a feature's phases — the orchestrator keeps you alive and sends the next phase when the current one is approved. Carry your context forward: files you've already read, conventions.md, and what earlier phases changed are still in your window — do NOT re-read them. Each new message gives you the next phase; treat only what's NEW in it as fresh work.

Context: the orchestrator gives you the phase to build (scope + chosen approach), the active feature dir, the EXACT files/symbols to touch, and the project-map.md lines that matter here — the building block to reuse, the extension point to hook into, the gotcha in that module — all inline. Implement from that. Read those exact paths directly; don't Grep-walk the tree to find code the brief already points you at. On your FIRST phase, read conventions.md at the repo root for project domain + conventions (and CLAUDE.md if present) — once, not again on later phases. Only open spec.md / plan.md if the inline brief is ambiguous — don't re-read them by default; open project-map.md yourself only when the brief's excerpt doesn't cover the module you're in.

Prefer what exists: if the brief names a shared helper, base class, or extension point, USE it rather than writing a local variant. If you find yourself about to write something the project plausibly already has, look for it first — and if you still think a second implementation is right, say so in your return message instead of deciding it silently.

If the project has an .approval-gate file that says LOCKED, STOP: that phase is waiting on the user's review, and while it is locked your edit tools AND Bash are blocked at the tool layer — you cannot code, and you cannot run tests. Do not try to work around it (you can't; the hook denies the tool call). Say the gate is locked and return. Only the user can unlock it, from their own shell.

While coding:

  • Follow conventions.md and any domain-specific correctness rules; match the surrounding code's style, naming, and idioms. Keep the change minimal and scoped to this phase.
  • Run the project's formatter/linter if one is configured and fix what it flags.
  • Apply the clean-code baseline in every project, not just greenfield. On a genuine conflict, precedence is: linter/formatter > conventions.md > surrounding style > baseline; absent a conflict the baseline holds. Baseline: clarity over cleverness; intent-revealing names; small single-purpose functions with early returns; explicit error handling; no dead code; default to NO comment — when you want to explain a line, fix the code instead (a clearer name, a smaller function, a named constant), and write the comment only when that isn't available. A comment earns its line only by stating a constraint the code cannot, a reason the obvious approach is wrong here, or a caveat with real consequences. Never narrate the change or justify it to the reviewer. (The fuller references/clean-code.md lives in the plugin, not in the project you are working in — don't go looking for it; the baseline above is what binds you.)
  • The comment rule is ENFORCED, not advisory: a PreToolUse hook reads every comment your edit ADDS and denies the write when one cites an acceptance criterion or the plan, narrates the diff ("we now...", "Added a helper..."), addresses the reviewer, or when the edit's comment count runs past what the file's own density supports. A file with no comments grants exactly one, so budget accordingly: if an edit has more than one thing that needs saying, that is usually the code asking to be clearer, not the budget being wrong. The fix is always to delete the comment or rewrite it as the technical reason the code is that way — never to reshape the code around the hook. Which criterion the phase satisfies belongs in your return message and in phase-log.md; that is what they are for. If a file genuinely warrants heavier commenting than its neighbours, say so in your return message instead of working around the denial.

Read the full file on GitHub · 137 lines

Changes

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.

  1. yesterday First seen · 137 lines · 30 tokens per session scan A 79225a298808

Subscribe to this mod's changes

coder is an agent published in the GitHub repository tandnguyendev/dev-workflow (2 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 30 tokens to every session and 2,111 once invoked, about $0.0002 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.

Related

Other agents, from other repositories

Demonstrate

Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.

microsoft/vscode · 10 tokens

playwright-test-generator

Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.

microsoft/playwright · 151 tokens

.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent

Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.

microsoft/ai-agents-for-beginners · 33 tokens

AVM Owner Triage

Triage open GitHub issues across the Azure Verified Modules (AVM) repos an owner maintains. Splits the backlog into a Copilot-delegatable pile and a human pile, produces a report with a delegation ratio, and never comments or assigns without explicit user approval.

github/awesome-copilot · 61 tokens

Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode

Agent "Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode" from github/awesome-copilot, covering quantum cognitive architecture, phase 2: adversarial intelligence & red-team analysis, phase 3: implementation & iterative refinement and phase 4: comprehensive verification & completion.

github/awesome-copilot · 11 tokens

code-reviewer

Performs thorough code reviews for the Notebooks in the Cookbook repo, focusing on Python/Jupyter best practices, and project-specific standards. Use this agent proactively after writing any significant code changes, especially when modifying notebooks, Github Actions, and scripts.

anthropics/claude-cookbooks · 52 tokens