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/unixcrh/phuryn-pm-skillsWrote 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/unixcrh/phuryn-pm-skills/sprint)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/unixcrh/phuryn-pm-skills/sprint"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/unixcrh/phuryn-pm-skills/sprint/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/unixcrh/phuryn-pm-skills/sprint"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/unixcrh/phuryn-pm-skills/sprint.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 | $0.00015 | $0.01205 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00008 | $0.00602 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00241 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00120 |
Grade A, and why
sprint 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 11d 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.
This is a copy
100% identical to sprint — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 194 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/sprint -- Sprint Lifecycle
Three modes covering the sprint lifecycle: plan for sprint planning, retro for retrospectives, release-notes for shipping communication.
Invocation
/sprint plan 2-week sprint, 4 engineers, focus on checkout improvements
/sprint retro [paste team feedback or sprint data]
/sprint release-notes [paste tickets, changelog, or PRD]
/sprint # asks which phase you're in
Modes
Plan Mode
Prepare for sprint planning with capacity estimation, story selection, and risk identification.
Workflow
Step 1: Gather Sprint Context
- Sprint duration (1 or 2 weeks)
- Team composition (engineers, designers, QA — and availability)
- Sprint goal or focus area
- Backlog items to consider (paste, upload, or describe)
- Any carry-over from last sprint
- Known interruptions (holidays, on-call, meetings)
Step 2: Estimate Capacity
Apply the sprint-plan skill:
- Calculate available engineering hours/points after meetings, on-call, PTO
- Apply a velocity adjustment based on historical data (if provided) or industry standard (70% of theoretical capacity)
- Show capacity breakdown per team member
Step 3: Select and Sequence Stories
- Recommend which stories fit within capacity
- Flag dependency chains (A must complete before B starts)
- Identify risks: stories that are underspecified, have external dependencies, or need design input
- Balance quick wins with larger items
- Ensure every story has acceptance criteria
Step 4: Generate Sprint Plan
## Sprint Plan: [Sprint Name/Number]
**Duration**: [dates]
**Sprint Goal**: [one sentence]
**Team**: [members and availability]
### Capacity
| Member | Available Days | Points/Hours | Notes |
|--------|--------------|-------------|-------|
**Total capacity**: [X] points/hours
**Recommended commitment**: [Y] points/hours (with buffer)
### Selected Stories
| # | Story | Points | Owner | Dependencies | Risk |
|---|-------|--------|-------|-------------|------|
### Sprint Risks
1. [Risk] — Mitigation: [action]
### Definition of Done
- [ ] Code reviewed
- [ ] Tests passing
- [ ] Deployed to staging
- [ ] QA approved
- [ ] Documentation updated (if applicable)
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 194 lines · 15 tokens per session scan A 411d61287f69
sprint is a command published in the GitHub repository unixcrh/phuryn-pm-skills (2 stars, last pushed 6mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 15 tokens to every session and 1,205 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to sprint, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other commands, from other repositories
sync-coordinator
Multi-package synchronization and version alignment with ruv-swarm coordination for seamless integration between claude-code-flow and ruv-swarm packages.
land
Cadence-tick autonomous PR babysitter (CI-fix, resolve, converge, merge, close, release).
create-release-note
Generate bug fix release notes from Jira tickets and linked GitHub PRs.
sync-coordinator
Multi-package synchronization and version alignment with ruv-swarm coordination for seamless integration between claude-code-flow and ruv-swarm packages.
pr
Create a GitHub PR from current branch with unpushed commits — discovers templates, analyzes changes, pushes.
taupr
The Tau Ceti worker loop — one unit of work per round, first that applies: rebase, fix CI, fix findings, review a stalled PR, else author a new one. Authoring checks the source material first, cleans up, and opens the PR; CI reviews it. We only self-review a PR that CI has left unreviewed for an hour.