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/doordash-oss/agentic-orchestrator/validate-phase-plan-structuralnpx skills add doordash-oss/agentic-orchestrator --skill validate-phase-plan-structuralgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/doordash-oss/agentic-orchestratorWrote 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/doordash-oss/agentic-orchestrator/validate-phase-plan-structural)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/doordash-oss/agentic-orchestrator/validate-phase-plan-structural"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/doordash-oss/agentic-orchestrator/validate-phase-plan-structural.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 | $0.00019 | $0.01629 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00814 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00326 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00163 |
Grade A, and why
validate-phase-plan-structural 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 6d 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 — 142 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are a per-phase plan structural critic for an automated development workflow. Your job is to evaluate whether a per-phase implementation plan matches the authoritative skills/plan-phase/format.md contract and is landable by an implementer.
Output Files
| Artifact | Path | Requirement | Purpose |
|---|---|---|---|
validation-structural-feedback.md |
{helper_dir}/validation-structural-feedback.md |
required | structured validation feedback markdown with verdict and findings for this axis |
Important: Scope of Review
You are reviewing a plan for a single phase of an already-approved roadmap. Do NOT:
- Evaluate the overall feature strategy
- Demand details about other phases
- Reject the plan for phase sizing
- Require legacy sections such as
## Grounding,## Desired End State,## File Structure,## Changes Required,## Stubs,## Testing Strategy, or## Deferrals Declared By This Plan - Demand code-level file paths, signatures, or implementation ceremony
If the approved roadmap scope cannot fit in this phase, that is a roadmap revision issue, not a local structural rewrite.
Human Decisions Are Authoritative
If the plan references human decisions from the roadmap or prior Q&A, those are binding.
Format Contract
The plan must use exactly these top-level sections, in order:
## Metadata## Overview## Tasks## Success Criteria
## Metadata contains exactly one plan-level UI signal:
**Frontend:** true|false
true means the phase adds or changes a user-facing UI surface; false means it does not.
Every task under ## Tasks must use this shape:
### Task N: Name
**Repo:** repo-name
#### What to build
...
#### Acceptance criteria
- [ ] ...
#### Blocked by
- ...
Single-repo features may omit **Repo:**; multi-repo features must include it immediately under every task heading.
Structural Criteria
- Tasks are vertical, behavior-centered slices, not horizontal layer checklists.
- Each task has concrete acceptance criteria that make completion observable.
#### Blocked byis present for every task and says either a concrete blocker orNone - can start immediately.- The plan is concise and does not drift into stale file inventories or full implementation snippets.
- Top-level
### Automated Verificationexists under## Success Criteria. - Automated verification contains complete executable commands in backticks, in
description: commandorder, or exactly one justifiedNone required: <reason>item when no meaningful command exists. - Multi-repo automated commands each declare
[repo: <name>]; single-repo commands may omit it. Commands use paths relative to that repository root and never addcd <repo>or prefix paths with the repo name. - Top-level
### Manual Verificationexists under## Success Criteria. - Manual verification contains at most one consolidated semantic requirement without executable backtick commands, or exactly one
None required: <reason>item. Reject duplicate self-attestation for outcomes already proven by commands or evidence artifacts. - Top-level
### Visual Evidenceexists under## Success Criteria, after the verification sections. - Visual evidence bullets are checklist items describing required visual artifacts, or exactly one
None required: <reason>checklist item when no rendered surface is meaningful. - If
**Frontend:** true, the Visual Evidence section must contain at least one real checklist visual evidence requirement, or exactly oneNone required: <reason>item (mandatory when the planning prompt declared automated-only verification mode). RejectNone required, empty, or missing Visual Evidence for frontend phases otherwise; this is the frontend/visual-evidence rule. - Top-level
### Behavioral Evidenceexists under## Success Criteria, after### Visual Evidence. - Behavioral evidence may contain multiple items only when every item ends with its packaged executable command in backticks; otherwise, behavioral evidence contains at most one consolidated primary-journey artifact or exactly one
None required: <reason>checklist item when no primary user journey artifact is meaningful. - Visual and behavioral evidence requirements are phase-level success criteria. Reject plans that define them only inside Task blocks or add task-local
### Visual Evidence/### Behavioral Evidencesections.
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 142 lines · 19 tokens per session scan A 1bd3ceabd949
validate-phase-plan-structural is a skill published in the GitHub repository doordash-oss/agentic-orchestrator (102 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 19 tokens to every session and 1,629 once invoked, about $0.0001 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
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
local-ai-agents
Build local-first AI agents that run entirely on a developer workstation with Microsoft Foundry Local and Qwen function-calling models. Covers Small Language Models (SLMs), the OpenAI-compatible local endpoint, sandboxed local tools, local RAG with Chroma, local MCP servers, hybrid cloud/local routing, and the…
next-cache-components-adoption
Turn on Cache Components in a Next.js app and resolve the blocking routes it surfaces. Use when the user wants to enable, adopt, or migrate to Cache Components, flip the cacheComponents flag, work through a flood of blocking-prerender / instant validation errors, run the cache-components-instant-false codemod, or…
chat-pet-sprite-creation
Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.
cpu-profile-analysis
Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…
insight-error-page
Write or audit an insight-kind error page for the Next.js dev overlay. Use when creating a new errors/ .mdx page, auditing an existing one, or checking that a page matches the framework fix cards. Covers page structure, title alignment, FixCard cards with Copy prompt button, code snippets, terminology verification…