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 skills/archive228/loopkit/sprint-contractnpx skills add Archive228/loopkit --skill sprint-contractgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Archive228/loopkitWhat 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 | $0.00044 | $0.01104 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00022 | $0.00552 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00221 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00110 |
Grade A, and why
sprint-contract 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 2d 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 — 73 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Sprint Contract
The evaluator's leverage collapses when "done" is defined after the code exists. The generator ships something, the evaluator finds it plausible, the fuzzy spec silently reshapes to match what got built. Premature victory, dressed up.
Fix the timing: write the contract before the generator writes a line of code. The evaluator's job for the sprint is then mechanical — hold the artifact against the contract, no re-negotiation mid-flight.
Inspired by the planner/generator/evaluator split in Prithvi's March 2026 post on multi-agent harnesses.
When to apply
- You're about to start a chunk of work (one feature, one refactor, one bug fix) with an evaluator or reviewer persona in the loop.
- The planner output or upstream spec is ambiguous — you can imagine two reasonable implementations that both "satisfy" it.
- A session just rehydrated from
shift-notes/ a progress file and needs a concrete acceptance target before it picks up the keyboard.
Procedure
- Name the one deliverable. One feature, one sentence, user-observable. If you can't say it in a sentence, the sprint is too big — split it, contract the first slice.
- Write the acceptance predicates. 3-7 bullets, each one a check that either passes or fails. No "clean code", no "good UX" — write predicates a script or a browser click can decide.
- Name the runtime path. How is this exercised end-to-end? Which URL, which CLI invocation, which button click? The evaluator will drive this exact path — no substitutes.
- List the out-of-scope items. Two or three things the generator will be tempted to also fix. Written down = evaluator will reject them as scope creep, generator has an anchor when tempted.
- Sign it in the shift notes. Paste the contract into
claude-progress.txt(or equivalent) under a## Sprint contractheader, with the sprint start timestamp. Both personas reference this exact text for the rest of the sprint. - Then, and only then, write code.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 73 lines · 44 tokens per session scan A de27cdad2919
sprint-contract is a skill published in the GitHub repository Archive228/loopkit (753 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 44 tokens to every session and 1,104 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
wayfinder
Plan a huge chunk of work (more than one agent session can hold) as a shared map of decision tickets on your issue tracker, and resolve them one at a time until the way to the destination is clear.
setup-matt-pocock-skills
Configure this repo for the engineering skills: set up its issue tracker, triage label vocabulary, and domain doc layout. Run once before first use of the other engineering skills.
accessibility
Consolidated accessibility skill entrypoint for WCAG 2.2, ARIA Authoring Practices, cognitive accessibility, Section 508, EN 301 549, design intent verification, and the Accessibility Planner workflow.
release-notes
Generate user-facing release notes from tickets, PRDs, or changelogs. Creates clear, engaging summaries organized by category (new features, improvements, fixes). Use when writing release notes, creating changelogs, announcing product updates, or summarizing what shipped.
retro
Facilitate a structured sprint retrospective — what went well, what didn't, and prioritized action items with owners and deadlines. Use when running a retrospective, reflecting on a sprint, creating action items from team feedback, or learning how to run effective retros.
bug-triage
Read all open bugs in production/qa/bugs/, re-evaluate priority vs. severity, assign to sprints, surface systemic trends, and produce a triage report. Run at sprint start or when the bug count grows enough to need re-prioritization.