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 skills add cmdr-chara/codex-toolkit --skill multi-agent-work-coordinatorgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/cmdr-chara/codex-toolkitWrote 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/cmdr-chara/codex-toolkit/multi-agent-work-coordinator)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/cmdr-chara/codex-toolkit/multi-agent-work-coordinator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/cmdr-chara/codex-toolkit/multi-agent-work-coordinator/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/cmdr-chara/codex-toolkit/multi-agent-work-coordinator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/cmdr-chara/codex-toolkit/multi-agent-work-coordinator.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 | $0.00033 | $0.00605 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00242 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00121 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00060 |
Grade A, and why
multi-agent-work-coordinator 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 24d 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 — 55 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Multi-Agent Work Coordinator
Parallelize only work that is understood well enough to own, verify, and integrate independently.
Trigger boundary
Use this skill when several bounded work items can proceed independently after the relevant resource boundaries, dependencies, and acceptance criteria are known.
Do not trigger for initial discovery of an unknown problem space, tiny/tightly coupled work, ambiguous tasks, or choosing a Mission Control role alone.
Required inputs
Resolve the objective, acceptance criteria, candidate work items, dependencies, shared resources/artifacts, mutable-resource ownership, verification methods, protected user work, and integration owner. For repository tasks, also resolve relevant working-tree state and code ownership.
Safety baseline
- Preserve user work and unrelated artifacts.
- Give each mutable resource one writer at a time.
- Readers may overlap; writers may not.
- Parallelism never bypasses a specialist's safety, approval, privacy, or migration boundary.
- Keep integration and final acceptance with the parent task.
Workflow
- Decide if parallelism helps. Keep tightly coupled or sequential work together.
- Build the graph. Use
references/work-graph-schema.mdfor missions, dependencies, resource scopes, acceptance evidence, and integration gates. - Assign exclusive ownership. When scopes can be represented as workspace-relative paths/globs or logical resource IDs, run:
python skills/multi-agent-work-coordinator/scripts/ownership_check.py <work-graph.json>
- Form waves. Dispatch only dependency-ready work whose mutable-resource scopes do not overlap.
- Delegate. Use
references/mission-control-adapter.mdwhen Mission Control is the execution adapter. - Review handoffs. Require produced artifacts/evidence/blockers, not "done" assertions.
- Integrate in declared order. Resolve cross-mission drift and rerun integration-level checks affected by composition.
- Close the graph. Every node must be accepted, blocked, cancelled, or explicitly dropped by scope authority.
What ships with it
4 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 24d ago Changed · -141 lines · -45 tokens per session 35525b801417
- 1mo ago First seen · 196 lines · 78 tokens per session scan A cf917f25827b
multi-agent-work-coordinator is a skill published in the GitHub repository cmdr-chara/codex-toolkit (2 stars, last pushed 11d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 33 tokens to every session and 605 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
trace
Use when encountering bugs, test failures, runtime errors, broken builds, or "this doesn't work" reports. Systematic root-cause analysis before any patch — never blind-patches symptoms. Standalone, ends with a final-integration review of the fix. Trigger with /hyperflow:trace, "debug this", "find the root cause", "why…
issue
Use when starting a chain from a GitHub issue — turning an issue URL or number into a triaged, planned, dispatched, and reviewed pull request. Classifies the thread (bug → root-cause discipline, feature → plan chain, question → drafted reply), synthesizes a spec from the issue's own acceptance criteria, then runs the…
skeptical-triage
Reusable 3-round self-challenge + arbiter pattern for filtering false positives from findings/verdicts. Use when the cost of a false-positive gate block exceeds the cost of 4 extra LLM turns.
anti-patterns
Catalogue of known SDLC anti-patterns that greatcto agents must actively reject when reviewing architecture, plans, code, or post-mortems. Used by architect (pre-impl), pm (planning), senior-dev (impl), l3-support (post-incident).
review-all
Multi-agent code review for diffs (project-agnostic). Covers standards, bugs, security, DRY, smells, perf, tests, API contracts, a11y/i18n. Verifies each finding to eliminate false positives. Use for /review-all, pre-PR/pre-commit review, or auditing uncommitted/staged changes.
code-coherence-review
Reviews code and plans for logic coherence, correctness, and structural integrity.