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/duolahypercho/fusion-fableWrote 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/commands/duolahypercho/fusion-fable/fusion-plan)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/duolahypercho/fusion-fable/fusion-plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/duolahypercho/fusion-fable/fusion-plan/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/commands/duolahypercho/fusion-fable/fusion-plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/duolahypercho/fusion-fable/fusion-plan.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 | $0.00040 | $0.00646 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00016 | $0.00258 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00129 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00065 |
Grade A, and why
fusion-plan 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 2mo 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.
What it actually says
Invoke the fusion-plan skill on the task below. Run the full OMC-integrated flow:
- Requirements — pick the mode FIRST (Step 0 of SKILL.md):
- Non-interactive (default during plan execution, inside a sub-agent, or
--no-interview): do NOT interview, do NOT call AskUserQuestion, do NOT auto-chain omc-plan. Derive requirements from existing context (story docdocs/stories/STORY-*.md, the flagged section of the larger.omc/plans/*.md, and the task args) as the seed. If context is insufficient, stop and report what's missing — never block on an unanswerable question. - Interactive (a human is present, typed
/fusion-plandirectly): run OMC's real interview viaSkill("oh-my-claudecode:omc-plan")on the task verbatim (no--consensus; auto-detect interview vs direct) → initial plan in.omc/plans/<slug>.md. Capture that path as the seed; do not let OMC auto-execute.
- Non-interactive (default during plan execution, inside a sub-agent, or
- Deepen with the panel (3 rounds, seeded): each round, ONE Opus 4.8 panelist (Agent subagent,
model: opus) and ONE GPT-5.5 panelist (codex exec, high effort) independently critique-and-improve the current plan IN PARALLEL and BLIND. Round 1 seeds from the OMC plan (so every interview requirement is preserved); rounds 2–3 seed from the previous synthesis. After each round YOU (Opus 4.8) judge both (Consensus / Contradictions / Partial / Unique / Blind spots) and synthesize one tighter plan. Stop early onNO_MATERIAL_CHANGE(round ≥ 2). Ifcodexis missing, fall back to two Opus 4.8 panelists per round. - Write back: the synthesized plan must be concise but content-dense (no padding) and is written
back to the SAME
.omc/plans/<slug>.mdin OMC standard format, preserving all gathered requirements. - Handoff (offer, don't auto-run execution): quality gate via
/omc-plan --review .omc/plans/<slug>.md, then/teamor/ralphon approval.
Follow skills/fusion-plan/SKILL.md exactly. Do not edit OMC's own skills — integrate only through the
.omc/plans/*.md artifact and by invoking omc-plan.
Task: $ARGUMENTS
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 32 lines · 40 tokens per session scan A bafc1924df37
fusion-plan is a command published in the GitHub repository duolahypercho/fusion-fable (471 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 40 tokens to every session and 646 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-30.
fusion-plan compared with commands from other repositories
| Mod | Type | Stars | Last push | Licence | Scan | Tokens | Works with |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| fusion-planduolahypercho/fusion-fable | Command | 471 | 3mo ago | MIT | A | 40 | Claude Code |
| checklistgithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 13 | Claude Code |
| clarifygithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 27 | Claude Code |
| specifygithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 13 | Claude Code |
| analyzegithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 26 | Claude Code |
| convergegithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 35 | Claude Code |
| implementgithub/spec-kit | Command | 148k | yesterday | MIT | A | 14 | Claude Code |