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/bengous/claude-code-plugins/pair-planningnpx skills add bengous/claude-code-plugins --skill pair-planninggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/bengous/claude-code-pluginsWhat 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 | $0.00078 | $0.02105 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00039 | $0.01052 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00421 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00211 |
Grade C, and why
pair-planning scanned grade C with 1 finding against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 2d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Recursive force deletehighDestructive command
rm -rf with a variable or a broad path is one typo away from removing the wrong tree.
- No cleanup needed — each run uses a unique `slug`; never `rm -rf` session dirs. How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 161 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Pair-Planning: symmetric plan-to-consensus with Codex
Two frontier models plan the same task independently, then converge. You (Claude) hold the session context and orchestrate; Codex is the fresh pair of eyes. The deliverable is a single agreed plan — read-only, no implementation.
All Codex round-trips go through the helper, never codex directly:
"${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/pair-codex" fresh <dir> <prompt_file> r0 # start session
"${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/pair-codex" resume <dir> <prompt_file> r<n> # continue it
The helper enforces the correct invocation (--json -o, stdin closed, read-only,
thread-id capture, fail-hard). It prints Codex's final message to stdout and
writes <dir>/<label>.{jsonl,last,err} plus <dir>/thread_id. Effort defaults
to xhigh; override per call with CODEX_EFFORT=high when a round is light,
or CODEX_EFFORT=max for a genuinely hard round. Planning is reasoning-heavy —
don't downgrade the model tier.
1. Setup + launch Codex in the background
Action 0, the moment you're invoked — get Codex planning before you do, so the two plans are written in parallel and neither side anchors on the other.
- Pick the session slug (your handle — you control it) and create its dir:
Use the printed path literally in every later step — shell variables do not survive between Bash calls.slug="$(date +%s)-$(printf '%s' "$ARGUMENTS" | tr -cs 'A-Za-z0-9' '-' | cut -c1-40)" dir="/tmp/pair-planning/$slug"; mkdir -p "$dir"; echo "$dir" - Pre-flight — clarify only real blockers. Default to proceeding. Escalate
with one minimal
AskUserQuestiononly when a genuine blocker would make the two sides plan different tasks — ambiguous objective/scope, or an irreversible high-stakes direction. Never run an upfront questionnaire. (Judgment, not a rigid gate.) - Write the brief to
"$dir/task.md": the user's task verbatim, needed repo context, and a short Assumptions block (scope, constraints, out of scope). Both sides plan from this identical brief, so interpretation gaps cannot resurface later as phantom OPEN-points. - Write the Codex round-0 prompt to
"$dir/prompt-r0.md": tell it to read"$dir/task.md", inspect the repo read-only, and produce its own independent implementation plan (files to touch, approach, risks). Anti-anchoring: round 0 points attask.mdonly — never reference your plan here; it does not exist for Codex yet. - Launch Codex in the background so it plans while you do — run the helper
with the Bash tool's
run_in_backgroundoption (not blocking):
The harness notifies you when it exits; the helper writes"${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/scripts/pair-codex" fresh "$dir" "$dir/prompt-r0.md" r0"$dir/r0.last"and captures Codex's thread id into"$dir/thread_id".
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 · 161 lines · 78 tokens per session scan C 0e7e4599f7c0
pair-planning is a skill published in the GitHub repository bengous/claude-code-plugins (4 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 78 tokens to every session and 2,105 once invoked, about $0.0004 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it C with 1 finding (recursive force delete). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
aip-tracker
Track Airflow Improvement Proposal (AIP) implementation progress by comparing Confluence specs against codebase evidence. Use when asked to assess, report on, or compare AIP status.
html-ppt-hermes-cyber-terminal
OpenDesign + BYOK: choosing and wiring your own model, hands-on — cost, quality, and the routing decision. Built as a decision-grade AI literacy deck for engineers, IT, applied-AI teams.
development
开发语言能力索引。Python、Go、Rust、TypeScript、Java、C++、Shell。当用户提到编程、开发、代码、语言时路由到此。.
devops
DevOps 能力索引。Git、测试、DevSecOps、数据库。当用户提到 DevOps、CI/CD、Git、测试时路由到此。.
post-build-flow
Handles workflow verification and setup after build-workflow succeeds, or when the message contains workflow-verification-follow-up or workflow-setup-required. Load after direct builds, when verificationReadiness requires action, or on orchestrator verify/setup follow-up turns.
n8n:create-pr
Creates GitHub pull requests with properly formatted titles that pass the check-pr-title CI validation. Use when creating PRs, submitting changes for review, or when the user says /pr or asks to create a pull request.