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/jpicklyk/task-orchestrator/feature-implementationnpx skills add jpicklyk/task-orchestrator --skill feature-implementationgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/jpicklyk/task-orchestratorWhat 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 | $0.00112 | $0.02123 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00056 | $0.01061 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00022 | $0.00425 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00212 |
Grade A, and why
feature-implementation 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 — 249 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Feature Implementation Workflow
End-to-end workflow for a feature-implementation tagged item — the feature container
that holds the plan and holistic review. Child work items under this container use the
feature-task tag with lighter gates (task-scope instead of the feature-level
feature-summary, and no review phase by default — task-level review is opt-in via the
needs-task-review trait, which adds a review-checklist note to that child). A second
child-level trait, needs-test-author, is opt-in the same way (applied per the
/implement Step 1 trigger rule) and adds its own gate-enforced notes.
Covers all three phases (queue → work → review) with gate-enforced notes at each transition.
Usage: /feature-implementation [item-uuid]
- If
item-uuidis provided: load the existing item and resume from its current phase - If omitted: create a new item and start from the beginning
Phase 0 — Setup
If an item UUID was provided, call:
get_context(itemId="<uuid>")
Check canAdvance and missingRequiredNotes to determine which phase the item is in,
then jump to the appropriate phase below.
If no UUID was provided, create the item:
manage_items(
operation="create",
items=[{ title: "<feature title>", tags: "feature-implementation", priority: "medium" }]
)
Note the returned UUID and expectedNotes list. Confirm the item is in queue role,
then continue to Phase 1.
Phase 1 — Queue: Define the Feature Summary
Goal: Fill the single required queue-phase note before advancing to work.
1a. Fill feature-summary
Use manage_notes to upsert the feature-summary note:
manage_notes(
operation="upsert",
notes=[{
itemId: "<uuid>",
key: "feature-summary",
role: "queue",
body: "<content>"
}]
)
What to write: Keep this note lean (target under 2k chars) — it stays at the feature level, not the child-task level where the full spec-quality disciplines apply. Cover:
- Goal — the problem this solves and who benefits.
- Findings → tasks table — a table mapping each finding or requirement to the child task that will address it.
- Dependency edges — ordering constraints between child tasks, if any.
- Non-goals pointer — a reference to where non-goals are documented per child (each
child's
task-scopenote carries its own alternatives/non-goals/blast-radius/risk/test strategy per the spec-quality framework); this note does not repeat that analysis.
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 · 249 lines · 112 tokens per session scan A 89110352666c
feature-implementation is a skill published in the GitHub repository jpicklyk/task-orchestrator (205 stars, last pushed 27d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 112 tokens to every session and 2,123 once invoked, about $0.0006 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
pneuma-project
Project-context awareness — multi-session workflows around one topic, shared materials and preferences, and cross-mode handoffs as a high-value user path.
vc-intent-clarify
Clarify intent before RIPER-5 phase delegation. Scores ambiguity (4 signals); generates structured multi-choice questions for Tier 2. Two-mode: SIMPLE and DEEP.
vc-agent-strategy-compare
Evaluate 4 execution strategies (sequential, parallel-subagents, workflow, agent-team) for a phase or fan-out task. Outputs 7-signal score table, agent count math, cost guards, and strategy recommendation.
vc-generate-phase-program
Generate kickoff artifacts for a multi-phase program: umbrella plan, Program Goal Charter, session-goal block, per-phase plan stubs, and the 7-step per-phase inner loop reference.
vc-validate-findings
Use when running VALIDATE V2-V3 fan-out. Two-layer investigation (4 dimension agents + per-section feasibility agents) synthesized into PASS/CONDITIONAL/BLOCKED net gate. Strategy-agnostic.
vc-agent-browser
AI-optimized browser automation CLI with context-efficient snapshots. Use for long autonomous sessions, self-verifying workflows, video recording, and cloud browser testing (Browserbase).