Agentic Plugin Marketplace is a collection of reusable plugins, agents, skills, commands, and rules for coding-agent tools including Claude Code, Codex CLI, Cursor, OpenCode, Antigravity CLI, and GitHub Copilot. It is for developers assembling agentic workflows across multiple harnesses from shared Markdown sources, and the catalogue entries are examples or subsets of those workflow components.
Getting it into your agent
It runs from inside its repository, so the clone comes first — what it calls does not travel with the file alone.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/wshobson/agentsnpx agentmods add commands/wshobson/agents/new-trackWrote 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/wshobson/agents/new-track)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/wshobson/agents/new-track"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/wshobson/agents/new-track.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 5.1 | $0.00010 | $0.02029 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00005 | $0.01014 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00002 | $0.00406 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00001 | $0.00203 |
Grade A, and why
new-track 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 — 415 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
New Track
Create a new track (feature, bug fix, chore, or refactor) with a detailed specification and phased implementation plan.
Pre-flight Checks
-
Verify Conductor is initialized:
- Check
conductor/product.mdexists - Check
conductor/tech-stack.mdexists - Check
conductor/workflow.mdexists - If missing: Display error and suggest running
/conductor:setupfirst
- Check
-
Load context files:
- Read
conductor/product.mdfor product context - Read
conductor/tech-stack.mdfor technical context - Read
conductor/workflow.mdfor TDD/commit preferences
- Read
Track Classification
Determine track type based on description or ask user:
What type of track is this?
1. Feature - New functionality
2. Bug - Fix for existing issue
3. Chore - Maintenance, dependencies, config
4. Refactor - Code improvement without behavior change
Interactive Specification Gathering
CRITICAL RULES:
- Ask ONE question per turn
- Wait for user response before proceeding
- Tailor questions based on track type
- Maximum 6 questions total
For Feature Tracks
Q1: Feature Summary
Describe the feature in 1-2 sentences.
[If argument provided, confirm: "You want to: {argument}. Is this correct?"]
Q2: User Story
Who benefits and how?
Format: As a [user type], I want to [action] so that [benefit].
Q3: Acceptance Criteria
What must be true for this feature to be complete?
List 3-5 acceptance criteria (one per line):
Q4: Dependencies
Does this depend on any existing code, APIs, or other tracks?
1. No dependencies
2. Depends on existing code (specify)
3. Depends on incomplete track (specify)
Q5: Scope Boundaries
What is explicitly OUT of scope for this track?
(Helps prevent scope creep)
Q6: Technical Considerations (optional)
Any specific technical approach or constraints?
(Press enter to skip)
For Bug Tracks
Q1: Bug Summary
What is broken?
[If argument provided, confirm]
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 · 415 lines · 10 tokens per session scan A 582fdf4ac810
new-track is a command published in the GitHub repository wshobson/agents (39,449 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 10 tokens to every session and 2,029 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 2026-09-03.
Other commands, from other repositories
update-docs
Scan for recently modified files and update corresponding documentation.
handoff
Create a handoff document for seamless session continuity.
roadmap-track.template
This prompt was authored for Claude-style slash workflows. In Codex runtime, adapt tool calls as follows.
vision-init.template
This prompt was authored for Claude-style slash workflows. In Codex runtime, adapt tool calls as follows.
vision-new-product.template
This prompt was authored for Claude-style slash workflows. In Codex runtime, adapt tool calls as follows.
github-menu-issues-list.template
This prompt was authored for Claude-style slash workflows. In Codex runtime, adapt tool calls as follows.