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/easyinplay/harnessed/phasenpx skills add easyinplay/harnessed --skill phasegit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/easyinplay/harnessedWhat 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 | $0.00144 | $0.00952 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00072 | $0.00476 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00029 | $0.00190 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00095 |
Grade A, and why
discuss-phase 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 2d 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 — 78 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
discuss-phase workflow (v3)
Overview
2-phase sub-workflow mapping CLAUDE.md "Stage ①.b Phase 层 — GSD /gsd-discuss-phase 灰色澄清" onto harnessed runtime (Phase v3.0-3.4 W0.2 — D-04 Stage ① Discuss 三层 + Pattern A sub-workflow ship)。
| phase | id | upstream | model | capability / invokes | gate / artifacts |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 01-gsd-discuss |
gsd | sonnet | {{ capabilities.gsd-discuss-phase.cmd }} |
gate: judgments.phase-gate.gsd-discuss-phase.fires |
| 2 | 02-persist |
planning-with-files | haiku | {{ capabilities.planning-with-files.cmd }} + invokes: /plan |
artifacts_expected: [findings.md, knowledge.md] |
Capability refs
Sister workflows/capabilities.yaml entries:
gsd-discuss-phase— Bucket 2 (impl: gsd, cmd: /gsd-discuss-phase)planning-with-files— Bucket 4 (impl: claude-code-plugin, cmd: /plan)
Gate refs
Sister workflows/judgments/phase-gate.yaml:
gsd-discuss-phase.fires—phase.open_decisions >= 2 or phase.has_cross_phase_data_flow == true or phase.scope_days > 1
Invocation
- Slash command:
/discuss-phase <num>(afterharnessed setup)
Routing rules
跳过条件 (sister CLAUDE.md "Phase 层 ❌ 跳过"):
- 单一明确子任务
- 跟前 phase 同 module 同 pattern
- < 1 天工作量
- bug 修复且已有最小复现
How to invoke
Clarification needs real user dialogue, so run this stage directly in THIS session — do NOT spawn it, and do NOT improvise: follow these steps so the locked spec is persisted for the execution stages.
- Evaluate the clarification criteria for "$ARGUMENTS":
- Strategic — new feature / milestone / unclear business scope → gstack
/office-hours+/plan-ceo-review - Phase — ≥2 open implementation decisions / unclear cross-phase API contract → GSD
/gsd-discuss-phase - Subtask — ≥2 distinct approaches / core algorithm / API contract design / high error cost → superpowers brainstorming
- Strategic — new feature / milestone / unclear business scope → gstack
- For each layer that fires, hold the dialogue with the user (use AskUserQuestion for option-style decisions) and lock every open decision.
- Transparent-skip layers that don't fire — state which were skipped and why.
- Persist the locked decisions to
.planning/via planning-with-files (findings.md/task_plan.md).
What ships with it
2 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.
- 2d ago First seen · 78 lines · 144 tokens per session scan A e47d2a5049c0
discuss-phase is a skill published in the GitHub repository easyinplay/harnessed (2 stars, last pushed 7d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 144 tokens to every session and 952 once invoked, about $0.0007 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
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…
harness-creator
Build, audit, and improve harnesses that make AI coding agents reliable: AGENTS.md/CLAUDE.md instruction files, feature/state tracking, verification gates, scope boundaries, session handoff, memory persistence, context budgets, tool-permission safety, and multi-agent coordination. Use this whenever a coding agent is…
comet-native
Comet Native 工作流。当用户明确调用 /comet-native、要求启动或恢复 Native change，或入口路由到 Native 时使用。.
comet-hotfix
Comet 预设 —— 通过 open-build-verify-archive 短流程修复已有行为 bug。.
comet-verify
Comet Phase 4: Verify and Close. Invoke with /comet-verify. Verify implementation matches design, handle development branch.
comet-design
Comet Classic 阶段 2 —— 为 change 产出深度技术 Design Doc。.