PM Skills is a collection of plain-Markdown instructions that teach AI assistants structured methods for handling professional, personal, and life-admin tasks. People use it with Claude, ChatGPT, Gemini, Cursor, Codex, and other supported agents for work such as writing product requirements, reviewing documents, or planning difficult situations.
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/mohitagw15856/pm-claude-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/rules/mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills/planning-application-statement)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/rules/mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills/planning-application-statement"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills/planning-application-statement/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/rules/mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills/planning-application-statement"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/rules/mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills/planning-application-statement.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 | $0.00115 | $0.01317 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00057 | $0.00659 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00023 | $0.00263 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00132 |
Grade A, and why
planning-application-statement 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 — 90 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Planning Application Statement
A case officer reads dozens of these. What they need is to find, quickly, that you have understood the site, that the design follows from that understanding, and that each relevant policy is addressed by name. What they get is usually a description of the proposal. This writes the version that answers their report for them — and pre-empts the objections that will land in the consultation period.
What This Skill Produces
- Site and context analysis — what is actually there, what characterises it, and what the site can take
- The design rationale — how the proposal follows from the analysis, including what was tried and rejected
- A policy compliance table — each relevant local and national policy, named, with how the scheme complies
- Access and amenity assessment — inclusive access, overlooking, overshadowing, noise, parking, and refuse
- Pre-empted objections — the concerns neighbours will raise, addressed before they are raised
- The consultation record — pre-application advice and any engagement already undertaken
Required Inputs
Ask for these if not provided:
- The proposal — what is being applied for, with areas, heights, and materials
- The site — location, existing use, constraints, designations, boundaries, and neighbouring context
- The policy framework — the local plan policies and any supplementary guidance that apply
- Pre-application history — any advice received, and previous applications or refusals on the site
- The known sensitivities — what neighbours or the parish have objected to before
Framework: Analysis, Then Rationale, Then Policy by Name
- Analyse the site before describing the scheme. Character, scale, materials, topography, boundaries, and how the site is actually used. A rationale unearned by analysis reads as post-hoc justification.
- Show the design evolving. Including the option you rejected and why. Officers trust a scheme that visibly responded to constraints more than one presented as inevitable.
- Address policies by their number and name. A general claim of compliance forces the officer to do the work, and they will do it less generously than you would.
- Answer amenity concretely. Distances, angles, and hours — not 'no undue impact'. Overlooking and overshadowing are measurable and should be measured.
- Pre-empt the objections you know are coming. Parking, overlooking, precedent, construction disturbance. Addressed in the statement, they arrive at the officer already answered.
- Be accurate about what is proposed. A discrepancy between the statement and the drawings costs credibility for the whole application.
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 · 90 lines · 115 tokens per session scan A d97d51f4983b
planning-application-statement is a cursor rule published in the GitHub repository mohitagw15856/pm-claude-skills (1,341 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 115 tokens to every session and 1,317 once invoked, about $0.0006 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 cursor rules, from other repositories
cursor
Always-on my-adhd-caveman. Off with "stop adhd-caveman" or "normal mode".
ponytail
Ponytail, lazy senior dev mode. Always pick the simplest solution that works.
angular-20
This rule provides comprehensive best practices and coding standards for Angular development, focusing on modern TypeScript, standalone components, signals, and performance optimizations.
dev-standard
Apache Superset development standards and guidelines for Cursor IDE.
cli-error-handling
CLI command error handling patterns.
prefer-direct-imports-over-module-mocks
Prefer extracting a testable core over vi.mock / vi.resetModules when unit tests need to reach production logic entangled with config, env, or singletons.