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/oborchers/fractional-ctoWrote 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/oborchers/fractional-cto/plan-context)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/oborchers/fractional-cto/plan-context"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/oborchers/fractional-cto/plan-context/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/oborchers/fractional-cto/plan-context"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/oborchers/fractional-cto/plan-context.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 | $0.00035 | $0.02691 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.01076 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00538 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00269 |
Grade A, and why
plan-context 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 5d 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 — 213 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are pre-loading context for a future master plan. The user will run /planning-tools:plan-master later (with the --context <this-report> flag, optionally) to draft the actual plan. You are NOT writing a plan file, NOT entering plan mode, NOT calling ExitPlanMode. You run four stages and emit a structured scope report — then stop.
Input: $ARGUMENTS
Parse the arguments:
- A file path → Read it first; it is the planning source artifact.
- A ticket ID or ticket URL → treat it as a scope statement; also run the Stage 0 ticket-source detection below to fetch ticket content via adapter.
- A topic name → treat it as a scope statement; locate the source artifact via Glob if obvious (e.g.,
context/tickets/<ID>-*.md). --domains a,b,cflag (anywhere in arguments) → use this list verbatim instead of the Triage partition.- Empty arguments → ask the user for a topic or path before starting Stage 1.
Stage 0 — Ticket-source detection (optional)
Before Stage 1, run pattern detection against the first argument. If it matches one of these forms, fetch the ticket source via the adapter contract codified in planning-tools:progress-methodology:
| Pattern | Provider |
|---|---|
^[A-Z]{2,6}-\d+$ (e.g., AIA-1234, CI-21) |
Linear |
^https://linear\.app/.+/issue/([A-Z]{2,6}-\d+)/ |
Linear |
^https://github\.com/([^/]+)/([^/]+)/(issues|pull)/(\d+) |
GitHub |
^([^/\s]+/[^/\s]+)#(\d+)$ (e.g., org/repo#42) |
GitHub |
On a match:
- Fetch title, body, and all comments (no cap — per the comment-fetch policy in
progress-methodology):- Linear:
mcp__linear-server__get_issue(id)+mcp__linear-server__list_comments(issueId). - GitHub:
gh issue view <N> --repo <owner>/<repo> --json title,body,state,url,comments(orgh pr view).
- Linear:
- Augment the Stage 1 Triage source artifact with the fetched
{ title, body, comments[], url }block. Triage scans comments for acceptance criteria, prior decisions, and unresolved questions to flag in the Open Questions section of the scope report. - Persist the ticket block so Stage 3 workers receive it verbatim (each domain agent sees the same acceptance criteria + decision history).
If the matched provider's MCP/CLI is unavailable, fail loudly: e.g., Linear MCP not loaded — cannot fetch <ticket>. Re-run on a session that has the Linear MCP, or pass the topic as free-form text. Do not silently degrade.
If no pattern matches → no fetch, proceed to Stage 1 with the original arguments unchanged.
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 213 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A 3e528c72ff19
plan-context is a command published in the GitHub repository oborchers/fractional-cto (32 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 2,691 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-10-13.
Other commands, from other repositories
checklist
Generate a custom checklist for the current feature based on user requirements.
clarify
Identify underspecified areas in the current feature spec by asking up to 5 highly targeted clarification questions and encoding answers back into the spec.
specify
Create or update the feature specification from a natural language feature description.
converge
Assess the current codebase against the feature's spec, plan, and tasks, then append any remaining unbuilt work as new tasks to tasks.md so implement can complete it.
implement
Execute the implementation plan by processing and executing all tasks defined in tasks.md.
speckit.bug.fix
Apply the remediation from a bug assessment and record what was changed.