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 gosha70/code-copilot-team --skill ralph-loopgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/gosha70/code-copilot-teamWrote 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/gosha70/code-copilot-team/ralph-loop)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/gosha70/code-copilot-team/ralph-loop"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gosha70/code-copilot-team/ralph-loop/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/gosha70/code-copilot-team/ralph-loop"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/gosha70/code-copilot-team/ralph-loop.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 | $0.00026 | $0.01034 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00414 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00207 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00103 |
Grade A, and why
ralph-loop 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 — 110 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Ralph Loop (Single-Agent Autonomous Loop)
A single agent runs in a loop until the task is complete. Each iteration reads a plan, picks the next incomplete item, implements it, runs tests, and commits if passing.
When to Use Ralph Loop vs Team Workflow
| Factor | Ralph Loop | Team Workflow |
|---|---|---|
| Task scope | Single-domain, well-defined | Multi-domain, cross-cutting |
| Completion criteria | Verifiable by tests | Requires human judgment |
| Codebase familiarity | Greenfield or well-understood | Unfamiliar or complex |
| Design decisions needed | Few or none (plan is locked) | Many, iterative |
| Parallelism benefit | Low (sequential work) | High (independent domains) |
| Test suite | Exists and reliable | Missing or incomplete |
Use Ralph Loop when:
- The task has clear, testable completion criteria
- A plan is already approved and doesn't need human decisions mid-flight
- Work is sequential (each step depends on the previous)
- You expect 3+ iterations to reach completion
Use Team Workflow when:
- Multiple independent domains can be worked in parallel
- The task requires human design decisions during implementation
- There's no automated test suite to verify progress
- The work spans unrelated parts of the codebase
How It Works
- PRD file — A structured plan with user stories, each marked pass/fail
- Progress file — Append-only log of what was done, what was learned
- Loop — Each iteration: read PRD → pick next failing story → implement → test → commit if passing → update progress → repeat
- Stop condition — All stories pass, or max iterations reached
Core Pattern
while true; do cat PROMPT.md | claude -p; done
Or use the official ralph-wiggum plugin which implements this via a Stop hook with safety guards.
PRD Format
{
"stories": [
{ "id": "1", "description": "Set up project structure", "passes": true },
{ "id": "2", "description": "Implement data model", "passes": false },
{ "id": "3", "description": "Add API endpoints", "passes": false }
]
}
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 · 110 lines · 26 tokens per session scan A 4ba87050fe5b
ralph-loop is a skill published in the GitHub repository gosha70/code-copilot-team (7 stars, last pushed 17d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 26 tokens to every session and 1,034 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
x-qdev
A compact development workflow for a small, clearly defined code change. It keeps the requirement, initially failing tests, implementation, and real verification results in one task document, following TDD, or test-driven development.
agent-tdd-london-swarm
Agent skill for tdd-london-swarm - invoke with $agent-tdd-london-swarm.
agent-implementer-sparc-coder
Agent skill for implementer-sparc-coder - invoke with $agent-implementer-sparc-coder.
moai-workflow-tdd
Test-Driven Development workflow specialist using RED-GREEN-REFACTOR cycle for test-first software development. Use when developing new features from scratch or when behavior specification drives implementation.
behavior-contract
Bug condition/postcondition formalization as testable Behavior Contracts. Defines invariants that must be preserved across fixes.
deck-repro
Reproduce agent-deck bugs from an issue, transcript excerpt, or description in an isolated environment, and prove fixes with the same reproduction and a regression test. Use for a concrete agent-deck issue or candidate, verifying a fix, preparing a contributor bug-fix PR, or when deck-retro passes a candidate. Broad…