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/doodledood/manifest-dev/next-ticketnpx skills add doodledood/manifest-dev --skill next-ticketgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/doodledood/manifest-devWrote 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/doodledood/manifest-dev/next-ticket)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/doodledood/manifest-dev/next-ticket"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/doodledood/manifest-dev/next-ticket.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00076 | $0.01517 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00038 | $0.00758 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00303 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00152 |
Grade A, and why
next-ticket 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 today.
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 — 32 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
next-ticket
Find the store, read it, name one ticket. The store follows the ticket convention (../ticket-up/references/TICKET_CONVENTION.md — read it if the convention isn't already in context).
Finding the store. Read tickets/store-config.md — one fixed, repo-relative location naming the venue. A GitHub-venue config means the store is that repo's issues under the efforts' tracking issues; query instead of reading files. A project that deliberately keeps its store elsewhere says so in its own context file, already loaded when you run. Without either, look before asking: if no store exists anywhere, say so plainly and offer the two ways one appears — ticket-up on a finished manifest, or writing tickets by hand under the convention — since a project with no work tracked yet needs a store, not a question about which kind. Where something is there, don't assume which venue it is, not even when tickets/<effort>/ directories are sitting in front of you, since a project whose store moved to a tracker usually still has them. Ask, showing what you found so the answer is cheap to give, and write it to tickets/store-config.md so it's asked once.
Set the candidate scope. A bare invocation answers rather than asking which effort. When the conversation is already about one effort, scope to that effort. A store that deliberately declares an effort order uses that order; it is explicit operator policy and wins over the default. Otherwise enumerate every effort with open Tickets from the venue itself — tickets/<effort>/ in a file store, or effort labels on one open-issues query in GitHub — and compare their ready Tickets together. Read each relevant front file's destination and priority override so delay loss is judged against what that effort is trying to reach. No effort index or derived next-state file is kept.
When the candidates span more than one effort and the project has a North Star (NORTH_STAR.md at the repository root, or wherever the project's context file says it lives), read its Winning, and the number watched and Never fields: winning is what the efforts' destinations are weighed against — the cross-effort measure the front files alone don't supply — and a candidate whose work would cross a Never is surfaced with that clash rather than picked. When it consulted the North Star, the why-line says so. Without a North Star, or with its winning field still empty, compare exactly as below; within one effort nothing changes either way.
Choose by delay loss. Take candidates only from the open set in scope and keep only ready Tickets: open, unclaimed, all dependencies done. Read bounded recent closed history, including a file store's done/ archive, only when an explicit priority override needs it as ranking evidence. A Ticket is everything its venue holds for it, not the item body alone; the venue reference names those surfaces. Read every candidate whole, not just the ones already looking strong — attached context is part of what ranks a Ticket, so reading it only for front-runners lets the ranking decide what informs the ranking. Apply an explicit store or effort priority override where it reaches; otherwise use the convention's expected-delay-loss rule. Compare the strongest candidates by what project value is lost while each waits for the other's constrained human attention. Include ongoing or expiring harm, durable benefit that starts later, downstream work whose earliest useful start actually moves, and delayed information that worsens or postpones a material decision. Do not turn those into saved scores.
This picker allocates a human-plus-AI session, not unaided human implementation. Estimate only the interactive human attention needed until the human-dependent uncertainty, taste, or authority is resolved; do not charge routine implementation an AI can continue afterward. Do not infer days from traditional feature size or apply a fixed agent-speed multiplier. When plausible runtimes are short enough that their difference does not materially change delay loss, treat them as equal; shorter work is only a tiebreak. Continuity with an effort already in flight is also only a tiebreak.
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.
- today Changed dd6bc8c2f9cf
- 6d ago First seen · 32 lines · 76 tokens per session scan A f261c2b8450e
next-ticket is a skill published in the GitHub repository doodledood/manifest-dev (72 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 76 tokens to every session and 1,517 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
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.
vertical-real-estate
Residential-proptech domain knowledge so architect / pm aren't naive when speccing real-estate products (listings, lead-crm, transaction-coordination, property-mgmt). Codifies MLS/IDX reality, listing status lifecycle + syndication canonical-source, long-cycle lead nurture, transaction-coordination as the high-pain…
product-economics
Does this product make money at a price someone will pay? Forces contribution margin, a price with a stated basis, and a bottom-up market size — each number labelled measured / assumed / unknown, so a guess can never be read as a calculation.
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).
cost-model
Standardized cost-estimation framework for greatcto plans. Forces explicit LLM cost, infra cost, human-supervision time, and the (defensible) human-equivalent comparison. Output format is parsable by the board's /api/cost path — must follow exactly.
migration-ready-schema
Data-model rules that make a schema importable from day one, so the migration-import-engineer is never blocked on missing columns. Every SMB Product-Builder product must let a customer bring their data from an incumbent (ServiceTitan/Toast/Mindbody/Shopify) — that requires provenance (sourceref) and rollback…