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 eai-org/agent-toolkit --skill execute-plan-tasksgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/eai-org/agent-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/eai-org/agent-toolkit/execute-plan-tasks)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/eai-org/agent-toolkit/execute-plan-tasks"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/eai-org/agent-toolkit/execute-plan-tasks/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/eai-org/agent-toolkit/execute-plan-tasks"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/eai-org/agent-toolkit/execute-plan-tasks.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00032 | $0.00968 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00484 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00194 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00097 |
Grade A, and why
execute-plan-tasks 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 5d 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 — 91 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Execute plan tasks
One task per run — implement it, verify it, tick it, stop. The review between tasks is the point; never carry on into the next.
Invocation: /execute-plan-tasks <plan-path> [task-id]
Pick the task
Read the plan whole — summary, conventions and overrides, the steps the task cites, acceptance
criteria — then its ## Tasks section. Ambiguous or missing plan path → ask. Several task sections
→ ask which one this run works from. No task section → stop and point at /split-plan-tasks.
task-id given → that task; none → the first unticked one in order. A range or a whole group → run
its first task only, saying the rest need their own runs; a task already ticked → say so and ask
whether to redo it. Its dependencies — earlier tasks in its group, plus every task in each group its
Depends on line names — must be ticked; name any unticked dependency and ask before proceeding.
Done when the chosen task, its steps, its acceptance criteria and its dependency state are stated.
Execute
- Scope is the task's steps, nothing else: no work belonging to a later task, no drive-by refactors. Work the plan calls for that no task covers → report it, don't absorb it.
- The plan's conventions and overrides bind every task, this one included.
- Never guess. What the code settles, settle by reading it; what it doesn't goes to the user as
one question carrying your recommendation. Append each settled deviation from the plan, and its
why, as one line to the decisions log beside the plan (
<slug>.DECISIONS.md), creating it if absent. - A copy is not exempt. A file the plan says to copy or mirror was written for its own runtime and tooling: check each setting fits this task's target before copying. A misfit is a deviation — settle and log it as above.
- Blocked outright — a step the codebase contradicts, an unmet prerequisite — → stop, leave the task unticked, report what blocks it.
Done when every step of the task is implemented, or its blocker reported.
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 91 lines · 32 tokens per session scan A af21aeeacc72
execute-plan-tasks is a skill published in the GitHub repository eai-org/agent-toolkit (46 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 32 tokens to every session and 968 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-09-04.
Other skills, from other repositories
lab-hardware-cad
Design custom laboratory hardware as parametric build123d models and export fabrication-ready STEP, STL, and DXF files - microfluidic chips and molds, optomechanical mounts and breadboard adapters, cuvette and microplate holders, tube racks, animal-behavior rigs, and 3D-printed instrument fixtures. Use when a research…
opentrons-integration
Author, review, migrate, simulate, and troubleshoot official Opentrons Python Protocol API v2 protocols for Flex and OT-2 robots. Use for robot-specific liquid handling, deck and labware setup, pipettes, modules, runtime parameters, liquid classes, and Opentrons App analysis. Use pylabrobot instead when one workflow…
pylabrobot
Develop and review PyLabRobot lab-automation resources, liquid-handling plans, offline simulations, and supported-device integrations. Use for PyLabRobot protocols or API questions; keep physical execution behind an explicit operator safety gate.
offensive-wifi
Wireless / 802.11 attack methodology for red team engagements and wireless security assessments. Covers monitor-mode setup, WPA/WPA2-PSK handshake capture and PMKID attacks, WPA3 SAE downgrade and Dragonblood, WPA-Enterprise (EAP) attacks (MSCHAPv2 cracking, EAP-TLS cert theft, evil-twin RADIUS), Karma / Known Beacons…
offensive-wifi-recon
Wi-Fi reconnaissance methodology — adapter selection, monitor mode and packet injection setup, regulatory domain handling, multi-band airspace mapping, hidden SSID discovery, BSSID/ESSID/channel/PMF/encryption fingerprinting, client probe analysis, vendor OUI lookup, war-driving with Kismet/airodump-ng/Wigle, and…
offensive-z-wave
Z-Wave attack methodology — sniffing with Z-Force / EZ-Wave / RTL-SDR + ZniffMobile, S0 (legacy) network-key derivation flaw and key reuse, S2 (modern) ECDH commissioning analysis, replay/injection on unauthenticated nodes, default-key brute-force on test deployments, and home-automation hub pivots. Use when targeting…