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/isvlasov/rageatc-oss/solutioningnpx skills add isvlasov/rageatc-oss --skill solutioninggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/isvlasov/rageatc-ossWrote 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/isvlasov/rageatc-oss/solutioning)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/isvlasov/rageatc-oss/solutioning"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/isvlasov/rageatc-oss/solutioning.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 5.1 | $0.00031 | $0.00849 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00425 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00170 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00085 |
Grade A, and why
solutioning 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 6d 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 — 87 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Solutioning
Facilitate choosing an approach when the problem is defined but the direction isn't. Explore options with the user, filter through simplicity, and record the decision for handoff to creating-briefs.
Skip when only one viable option exists, the user has already committed to an approach, the choice is purely preferential, or the problem itself is still unclear (understanding-the-ask first).
Workflow
Step 1 — Classify the decision
Ask: "How expensive would this be to reverse? If we try it and it doesn't work, can we go back?"
- Reversible (two-way door) — file structure, naming, process experiments. Decide quickly at 70% confidence and course-correct as you learn. Watch for analysis paralysis.
- Irreversible (one-way door) — core architecture, database selection, major dependency. Invest in understanding trade-offs before committing. Watch for premature commitment.
The classification sets the evaluation depth for everything below.
Step 2 — Establish the simplicity baseline
"What's the simplest thing that could possibly work? Do we need this now, or are we anticipating future needs?" The simplest viable option becomes the baseline every other option must beat.
- YAGNI — "we might need X later" → "do we need X now? If not, add it when we do."
- KISS — "option A is more capable but complex" → "does simpler option B solve the current problem? Then complexity needs justification."
- Occam's Razor — prefer the option making the fewest assumptions about the future.
Step 3 — Generate options
The first option presented becomes the implicit default — challenge it deliberately: "We've discussed option A; what would option B look like?" "If we couldn't do that, what would we try instead?"
Stop at 2–4 meaningfully distinct options, or when the user confirms the main approaches are covered.
Step 4 — Compare
- Reversible: relative comparison to the baseline — better (+), worse (−), or same (S) per criterion. "For implementation speed, is option B better, worse, or the same as the baseline? For maintainability?"
- Irreversible: explicit pros and cons per option, grounded in current needs, concrete impacts, and real constraints.
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 87 lines · 31 tokens per session scan A 02e5ee8a9830
solutioning is a skill published in the GitHub repository isvlasov/rageatc-oss (9 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 31 tokens to every session and 849 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
design-method
Use when starting any design task — resolves register, sets the 3 dials, locks Gate 0, and routes to the right move and target skill.
design-webapp
Use when building or extending a dashboard, SaaS screen, or any authenticated app surface — use design-web instead for a marketing site.
design-web
Use when building or revising a marketing/landing/campaign page, register brand locked at Gate 0 — use design-webapp for app screens instead.
laravel-billing
Use when implementing subscriptions, invoices, payment methods, webhooks, or billing portals with Laravel Cashier (Stripe or Paddle).
react-tanstack-router
Use when implementing routing in a React app (NOT Next.js) with TanStack Router — file-based routes, loaders, search params.
git-flow
Use when committing, branching, opening PRs, or deciding merge/branch strategy.