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/subtasknpx skills add easyinplay/harnessed --skill subtaskgit 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 | $0.00133 | $0.01028 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00067 | $0.00514 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00027 | $0.00206 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00103 |
Grade A, and why
discuss-subtask 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 — 84 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
discuss-subtask workflow (v3)
Overview
1-phase sub-workflow mapping CLAUDE.md "Stage ①.c 子任务层 — superpowers brainstorming" onto harnessed runtime (Phase v3.0-3.4 W0.3 — D-04 Stage ① Discuss 三层 + D-05 phase.invokes_tools conditional fire + Pattern A sub-workflow ship)。
| phase | id | upstream | model | capability / invokes_tools | gate |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 01-brainstorm |
superpowers | opus | {{ capabilities.superpowers-brainstorming.cmd }} + conditional invokes_tools[grill-with-docs, grill-me] |
gate: judgments.subtask-gate.brainstorming.fires |
Capability refs
Sister workflows/capabilities.yaml entries:
superpowers-brainstorming— Bucket 4 (impl: superpowers, cmd: superpowers:brainstorming)grill-with-docs— Bucket 1 mattpocock (impl: mattpocock-skills, cmd: /grill-with-docs)grill-me— Bucket 1 mattpocock (impl: mattpocock-skills, cmd: /grill-me)
Gate ref
Sister workflows/judgments/subtask-gate.yaml:
brainstorming.fires—subtask.approaches >= 2 or subtask.core_algorithm == true or subtask.has_api_contract == true or subtask.error_cost == 'high'
Conditional tool invocation (D-05 invokes_tools)
phase.spec_ambiguous == true→ firegrill-with-docsphase.spec_ambiguous == true AND phase.no_docs == true→ firegrill-me
Invocation
- Slash command:
/discuss-subtask <text>(afterharnessed setup)
Routing rules
跳过条件 (sister CLAUDE.md "子任务层 ❌ 跳过"):
- 常规 CRUD / 跟现有模式一致
- 单一明显实现 (< 20 行 / 一个文件)
- 标准库直接调用
- bug 修复且已知根因
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 · 84 lines · 133 tokens per session scan A 796e3de952be
discuss-subtask is a skill published in the GitHub repository easyinplay/harnessed (2 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 133 tokens to every session and 1,028 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
mcp-builder
Guide for creating high-quality MCP (Model Context Protocol) servers that enable LLMs to interact with external services through well-designed tools. Use when building MCP servers to integrate external APIs or services, whether in Python (FastMCP) or Node/TypeScript (MCP SDK).
subagent-driven-development
Use when executing implementation plans with independent tasks in the current session.
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。.
comet-hotfix
Comet preset path: Bug fix / hotfix. Skip brainstorming, directly open → build → verify → archive. Applicable for behavior fixes, scenarios not involving new capability design.