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 commands/ramantiz/planship/reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/ramantiz/planshipWrote 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/ramantiz/planship/review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/ramantiz/planship/review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/ramantiz/planship/review.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 | $0.00024 | $0.00590 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00012 | $0.00295 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00005 | $0.00118 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00059 |
Grade A, and why
review 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 3d 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
Validate a planship PLAN.md after a human has edited it. Create nothing. Change nothing — not the plan, not the repo. Your output is a report.
Input: $ARGUMENTS — path to the plan (default PLAN.md).
Steps
-
Run the deterministic validator:
node "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/parse-plan.mjs" <plan-path> --reportIt reports, with line numbers:
- Errors (these block
/planship:ship): aBlocked bynaming a task that doesn't exist (with a "did you mean" suggestion), dependency cycles, self-dependencies, duplicate task titles, duplicate phase names, a###task before any##phase, an empty plan. - Warnings (these do not block): a phase with no tasks, a phase with no
> Milestone:line, a task with noDone when:, a task with noScope:.
- Errors (these block
-
Read the plan yourself and add what a parser cannot judge:
- Missing dependencies — a task that clearly cannot start before another one, with no
Blocked by. This is the most valuable thing you can find. - Wrong ordering — a task in Phase 0 that depends on Phase 2 work.
- Unverifiable acceptance — a
Done when:that no human could actually check ("it works", "the code is clean"). - Tasks that are really several tasks — a
Scopelist covering unrelated work. - Phases that aren't milestones — a phase that doesn't leave the project in a checkable state.
- Missing dependencies — a task that clearly cannot start before another one, with no
-
Report:
- The totals (phases, tasks, dependency edges).
- Every error, with the file:line and a concrete suggested fix (the exact replacement text).
- Every warning worth acting on.
- Your own findings from step 2, clearly marked as judgement rather than a hard error.
- A verdict: ready to ship, or N errors must be fixed first.
-
Do not apply the fixes. Offer them; the human edits the file. If they then ask you to apply a specific fix, that's a normal edit request and you may do it — but never as part of this command's default flow.
If the validator exits 0 with no warnings, say so plainly and point them at
/planship:ship <path>.
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.
- 3d ago First seen · 52 lines · 24 tokens per session scan A bb3c40c473fd
review is a command published in the GitHub repository ramantiz/planship (10 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 24 tokens to every session and 590 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 commands, from other repositories
git
Git operations with intelligent commit messages and workflow optimization.
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.
analyze
Perform a non-destructive cross-artifact consistency and quality analysis across spec.md, plan.md, and tasks.md after task generation.
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.