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/hoavdc/codexkit/codexkit-safe-pi-planningnpx skills add hoavdc/CodexKit --skill codexkit-safe-pi-planninggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/hoavdc/CodexKitWrote 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/hoavdc/codexkit/codexkit-safe-pi-planning)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/hoavdc/codexkit/codexkit-safe-pi-planning"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/hoavdc/codexkit/codexkit-safe-pi-planning.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00063 | $0.01167 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00032 | $0.00583 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.00233 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00117 |
Grade A, and why
codexkit-safe-pi-planning 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 yesterday.
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 — 130 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
SAFe PI Planning Facilitator
When to Use
- Before a new Program Increment (PI) starts
- When an Agile Release Train (ART) needs to align on the next 8–12 weeks
- When cross-team dependencies must be mapped and risks must be surfaced
- When PI Objectives need to be written with quantified Business Value
Procedure
Step 1 — Preparation (Pre-Event)
- Collect team capacity for each iteration (available story points or throughput)
- Pull the prioritized feature backlog from Product Management
- Identify known architectural and cross-team dependencies
- Prepare the blank Program Board (teams × iterations matrix)
Step 2 — Day 1: Draft Plan
- Business Context — Product Management presents vision and top features
- Architecture Vision — System Architect presents enablers and tech runway
- Team Breakout #1 — Each team drafts iteration plans, identifies dependencies
- Draft Plan Review — Teams present plans; stakeholders flag risks
- Management Q&A — Address impediments, resource conflicts, scope concerns
Step 3 — Day 2: Finalize
- Team Breakout #2 — Adjust plans based on feedback, resolve dependency conflicts
- Program Board Finalization — All dependencies mapped as strings on the board
- PI Objectives — Each team writes 5–8 objectives using SMART format
- Business Value — Product Management assigns BV score (1–10) to each objective
- Confidence Vote — Fist of five (1–5); reshuffle if average < 3
Step 4 — Output
- Compile PI Objectives table (Objective / BV / Committed vs Uncommitted)
- Generate Program Board visualization (dependency map)
- Document risks identified during planning
- Record Confidence Vote result
Inputs
| Input | Required | Format |
|---|---|---|
| Feature backlog | Yes | Priority-ordered list with descriptions |
| Team capacity per iteration | Yes | Story points or throughput number |
| Known dependencies | Recommended | From/To team + feature reference |
| ART roster | Yes | List of teams in the ART |
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- yesterday First seen · 130 lines · 63 tokens per session scan A 16e9d0c74c38
codexkit-safe-pi-planning is a skill published in the GitHub repository hoavdc/CodexKit (21 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 63 tokens to every session and 1,167 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
add-linear
Add Linear channel integration via Chat SDK. Issue comment threads as conversations.
product-reviews
Help users design and facilitate product reviews that shift from status updates to strategic deep-dives, ensuring high-quality craftsmanship and organizational alignment.
delivering-delegated-linear-issues
当用户明确要求领取、处理、批量清空或定时扫描 Linear 的 Delegated to Agent issue 时使用;按队列状态、领取竞争、交付路径和收尾四个阶段渐进读取。.
github-issues
Create, manage, triage, and close GitHub issues. Search existing issues, add labels, assign people, and link to PRs. Works with gh CLI or falls back to git + GitHub REST API via curl.
analyzing-changes
Analyzes code changes, detects documentation drift, and evaluates change impact scope. Use when reviewing diffs, checking doc sync, or running pre-commit analysis. Automatically triggered after design-level changes or refactoring.
analyzing-security
Scans code for security vulnerabilities, detects dangerous patterns, and ensures security decisions are documented. Use when running security scans, auditing code, or checking for OWASP issues, injection risks, or sensitive data leaks. Automatically triggered on new modules, security-related changes, or post-refactor.