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/saski/arnesto/fic-validate-plangit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/saski/arnestoWrote 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/saski/arnesto/fic-validate-plan)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/saski/arnesto/fic-validate-plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/saski/arnesto/fic-validate-plan.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 | $0.00000 | $0.00746 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00373 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00149 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00075 |
Grade A, and why
fic-validate-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 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.
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.
FIC Validate Plan - Verify Implementation Completeness
Act as a Senior XP Developer validating that an implementation plan was correctly executed.
Task
Plan Path: $ARGUMENTS
If no path provided, search recent thoughts/shared/plans/ for the latest plan.
Validation Process
Step 1: Context Discovery
-
Read the implementation plan completely
-
Identify what should have changed
- List all files that should be modified
- Note all success criteria
- Identify key functionality to verify
-
Gather implementation evidence
# Check recent commits git log --oneline -n 20 # Check what changed git diff HEAD~5..HEAD --stat # Run comprehensive checks make check test
Step 2: Systematic Validation
For each phase in the plan:
-
Check completion status
- Look for checkmarks in plan (- [x])
- Verify actual code matches claimed completion
-
Run automated verification
- Execute each command from success criteria
- Document pass/fail status
- Investigate any failures
-
Assess manual criteria
- List what needs manual testing
- Provide clear steps for verification
-
Think about edge cases
- Were error conditions handled?
- Are there missing validations?
- Could this break existing functionality?
Step 3: Generate Validation Report
## Validation Report: [Plan Name]
### Implementation Status
✓ Phase 1: [Name] - Fully implemented
✓ Phase 2: [Name] - Fully implemented
⚠️ Phase 3: [Name] - Partially implemented (see issues)
### Automated Verification Results
✓ Build passes: `make build`
✓ Tests pass: `make test`
✗ Linting issues: `make lint` (3 warnings)
### Code Review Findings
#### Matches Plan:
- Database migration correctly adds [table]
- API endpoints implement specified methods
- Error handling follows plan
#### Deviations from Plan:
- Used different variable names in [file:line]
- Added extra validation in [file:line] (improvement)
#### Potential Issues:
- Missing index on foreign key
- No rollback handling in migration
### Manual Testing Required:
1. UI functionality:
- [ ] Verify [feature] appears correctly
- [ ] Test error states
2. Integration:
- [ ] Confirm works with existing [component]
- [ ] Check performance with large datasets
### Recommendations:
- Address linting warnings before merge
- Consider adding integration test for [scenario]
- Document new API endpoints
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 · 137 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 4214da7d8e9e
fic-validate-plan is a command published in the GitHub repository saski/arnesto (5 stars, last pushed 7d ago), licensed Unlicense. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 746 tokens. 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
ops-sweep
Sweep all repos/sessions via git deltas and refresh the Agentic Ops Ledger (low-token). Use at session end, or when asked to update the ledger, document progress, or recommend next prompts.
coder-eval-implement-plan
Implement an approved codereval plan phase by phase with risk-scaled per-phase review, then a final code review.
OPSX: Bulk Archive
Archive multiple completed changes at once.
research
Research a technical or product question.
auto-run
PitWay: Manage auto-run authorization for automatic task continuation.
task-integrate
PitWay: Apply a dispatched task's worktree commit to the main tree.