Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add bdfinst/agentic-dev-team/plugin install dev-teamWrote 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/skills/bdfinst/agentic-dev-team/issues-from-plan)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/bdfinst/agentic-dev-team/issues-from-plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bdfinst/agentic-dev-team/issues-from-plan/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/skills/bdfinst/agentic-dev-team/issues-from-plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/bdfinst/agentic-dev-team/issues-from-plan.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 | $0.00048 | $0.01193 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00019 | $0.00477 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00239 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00119 |
Grade A, and why
issues-from-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 1mo 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 — 127 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Issues from Plan
Role: orchestrator.
Break an implementation plan into GitHub issues that can be worked independently.
Orchestrator constraints
- Decompose the plan into issues; do not implement.
- Preserve plan ordering and dependencies as issue links.
- Be concise. Report created issue numbers, no narration.
Process
1. Find the Plan
If a path is provided in arguments, read that file. Otherwise, look for the most recent plan in:
- Active plan in conversation context
.claude/memory/directory (phase progress files)plans/directory
Arguments: $ARGUMENTS
If no plan is found, ask the user to point you to one.
2. Analyze the Plan
Read the plan and identify each slice (### Slice <id>:), its acceptance criteria, and the shared architectural decisions. Derive the dependency links from the DAG, not file order — do not hand-infer them:
python3 "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/issue_deps.py" <plan-file>
This returns { "<slice>": ["<dep slice>", ...] } — each slice's direct predecessors. A slice listed earlier in the file carries no dependency on a later one unless the DAG says so.
Then locate the plan's spec (the linked spec artifact or docs/specs/<...>.md); it becomes the parent issue. If the plan has no associated spec, report that and create no parent issue (and no children) — stop here.
3. Draft Issues
For each unit of work, draft an issue with:
- Title: a Conventional Commit —
<type>: <short, action-oriented summary>(e.g.,feat: add user authentication endpoint), matchingcommitlint.config.js's ruleset. These titles seed branch names, PR titles, and release versions once the sub-issue's PR merges, and.github/workflows/issue-title-lint.ymllabelsneeds-conventional-titleon anything that doesn't conform — check proactively instead of relying on that backstop:printf '%s' "<title>" | npx commitlint --verbose. If it exits non-zero, fix the title before creating the issue. - Body:
- What to build (behavior description, not implementation details)
- Acceptance criteria as checkboxes
- Dependencies on other issues (by title reference)
- Relevant architectural decisions from the plan
- Testing approach
- Labels: suggest appropriate labels if the repo uses them
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 127 lines · 48 tokens per session scan A a2da7c359680
issues-from-plan is a skill published in the GitHub repository bdfinst/agentic-dev-team (295 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 48 tokens to every session and 1,193 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. 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 skills, from other repositories
mcore-split-pr
Split a PR into multiple PRs to reduce the number of required CODEOWNERS reviewer groups.
shiplog
Recap of everything shipped since the last run - cross-repo PRs, security fixes, star deltas, and X traction, synthesized into a digest article and a ready-to-post shiplog in your voice.
connect
Choose which wiki this session uses, the team project's pages on the Nimbalyst server or the project's local wiki of files, and connect a repository to its team project. Use at the start of a task before any wiki tool, when a wiki tool returns reponotbound, ambiguousproject, pinmismatch, projectnotaccessible…
llxprt-issue-workflow
Use this skill when asked to address, fix, or work on a GitHub issue in the llxprt-code repository. Covers the complete issue lifecycle - branch setup, gh CLI usage, test-first planning, subagent delegation and review loops, the full verification cycle (including the zai-glm-flash smoke test), open code review (ocr)…
cuga-github-issues
Create GitHub issues for cuga-agent (bugs, features, epics, designs, and related work) against origin using gh, with epic → feature → issue hierarchy and GraphQL sub-issue linking. Use when the user says create new issues, report a bug, file a bug, feature request, new feature, create an epic, GitHub issue, sub-issue…
implement-issue
Implement a Linear brief in a named GitHub repo. Use when the brief skill is implement-issue or the user wants a new branch and draft PR.