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 dzianisv/opencode-plugins --skill feature-workflowgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/dzianisv/opencode-pluginsWrote 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/dzianisv/opencode-plugins/feature-workflow)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/dzianisv/opencode-plugins/feature-workflow"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dzianisv/opencode-plugins/feature-workflow/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/dzianisv/opencode-plugins/feature-workflow"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/dzianisv/opencode-plugins/feature-workflow.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 | $0.00037 | $0.01993 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00797 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00399 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00199 |
Grade A, and why
feature-workflow 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 — 359 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Feature Development Workflow
A structured 11-step process for developing features that ensures quality, traceability, and proper review.
Prerequisites
- Git repository initialized
- GitHub CLI (
gh) authenticated - Access to run tests (unit and E2E)
- Todo tool available for tracking progress
The 11-Step Process
Step 1: Create a Plan
Before writing any code, plan the work:
## Feature: [Name]
### Goal
[One sentence describing what we're building]
### Why
[Problem this solves or value it provides]
### Scope
- [ ] What's included
- [ ] What's NOT included (explicit boundaries)
### Technical Approach
1. [High-level step 1]
2. [High-level step 2]
3. [etc.]
### Risks / Open Questions
- [Any unknowns or concerns]
Use the Todo tool to capture each major task from the plan.
Step 2: Create GitHub Issue (if not exists)
Check for existing issue or create one:
# Search for existing issue
gh issue list --repo OWNER/REPO --search "feature keywords"
# Create new issue if needed
gh issue create --repo OWNER/REPO \
--title "feat: [Feature Name]" \
--body "$(cat <<'EOF'
## Summary
[Brief description]
## Motivation
[Why this is needed]
## Proposed Solution
[High-level approach]
## Acceptance Criteria
- [ ] Criterion 1
- [ ] Criterion 2
- [ ] Tests pass
- [ ] Documentation updated
EOF
)"
Record the issue number for linking in commits and PR.
Step 3: Define Task Scope in Issue
Update the issue with detailed scope:
gh issue comment ISSUE_NUMBER --body "$(cat <<'EOF'
## Implementation Plan
### Design
[Architecture decisions, data flow, etc.]
### Files to Modify
- `path/to/file1.ts` - [what changes]
- `path/to/file2.ts` - [what changes]
### New Files
- `path/to/new.ts` - [purpose]
### Testing Strategy
- Unit tests for [X]
- E2E tests for [Y]
- Manual verification of [Z]
### Out of Scope
- [Explicitly list what this PR won't do]
EOF
)"
Step 4: Fetch Latest Changes
Always start from up-to-date main:
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 · 359 lines · 37 tokens per session scan A 1faf0af612f8
feature-workflow is a skill published in the GitHub repository dzianisv/opencode-plugins (11 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 37 tokens to every session and 1,993 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
project-session-manager
Worktree-first dev environment manager for issues, PRs, and features with optional tmux sessions.
pr
Draft a PR body from OMC's paper trail — the smallest visual that proves the change, evidence consumed from the verify protocol (never re-collected), reversibility from the ADR test on the diff, glossary language throughout.
security-ownership-map
Analyze git repositories to build a security ownership topology (people-to-file), compute bus factor and sensitive-code ownership, and export CSV/JSON for graph databases and visualization. Trigger only when the user explicitly wants a security-oriented ownership or bus-factor analysis grounded in git history (for…
worktrees
Manage Git worktrees as OMO safe isolated coding lanes for complex, risky, or parallel work.
work-with-pr
Full PR lifecycle in a fresh task-owned git worktree: implement via the ulw-loop skill with mandatory evidence-bound manual QA → reviewer-readable English PR → verification loop (CI + Cubic, where Cubic is skipped only when its quota is exhausted) → merge by default → worktree cleanup. Decomposes one task into the…
git-master
Handles git work: atomic commits, rebase, squash, blame, bisect, reflog, and history questions. Use whenever a task needs a commit or a git-history investigation; skip for ordinary code edits.