workflows-work

A workflow step that carries out an implementation plan by assigning its tasks to coding sub-agents. It collects a structured summary from each task and saves those summaries for later review.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to read the plan, execute dependent tasks in order, run independent tasks in parallel, and record each sub-agent's results.
Why use it?
It organizes multi-part coding work and preserves evidence about what changed, which tests ran, and what risks remain.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Install

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/kastalien-research/thoughtbox/workflows-work
Any agent
npx skills add Kastalien-Research/thoughtbox --skill workflows-work
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Kastalien-Research/thoughtbox

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Per session 26 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 985 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00026 $0.00985
Opus 5 $0.00013 $0.00492
Sonnet 5 $0.00005 $0.00197
Haiku 4.5 $0.00003 $0.00098

Measured 3d ago against content hash 96b00a1caec9, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

workflows-work 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 3d 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.

.agents/skills/workflows-work/SKILL.md · 142 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 142 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Execute the implementation plan: $ARGUMENTS

Purpose

You are executing Stage 4 (Implementation) of the development workflow. A plan exists from Stage 3 with decomposed tasks. Your job is to dispatch sub-agents for each task, collect their structured summaries, and persist everything to disk.

Pre-Conditions

Before starting, verify:

  1. .workflow/state.json exists and currentStage is "implementation"
  2. Plan file exists (check stages.planning.artifacts.plan in state, usually .workflow/plan.md)

If pre-conditions are not met, report what's missing and halt.

Process

Step 1: Read the Plan

Read .workflow/plan.md and the spec/ADR it references. Build the task execution order from the dependency graph.

Step 2: Dispatch Sub-Agents

For each task in dependency order:

  1. Dispatch a sub-agent (use the Agent tool with subagent_type: "general-purpose") with:

    • The task definition from the plan (files, acceptance criteria, notes)
    • The relevant spec sections
    • The ADR hypotheses this task should support/test
    • Instructions to return the structured summary format (see below)
  2. Parallelize independent tasks: If tasks have no dependency between them, dispatch their sub-agents concurrently using parallel Agent tool calls.

  3. Persist the summary immediately upon receipt:

    .workflow/summaries/<branch-slug>-<task-id>.md
    
  4. Verify acceptance criteria: Check each criterion from the plan against the sub-agent's summary. If any fail, note them for review.

Sub-Agent Summary Format

Each sub-agent MUST return this format:

## Sub-Agent Work Summary

### Task

- Branch: <current branch>
- Spec: <spec path>

### Changes
- Files modified: [list]
- Files created: [list]
- Lines: +N / -N

### Claims
1. "[specific testable claim]"
   - Verifiable by: [test or command]

### Spec/Evidence Alignment
- H1 "<text>": SUPPORTS / REFUTES / NO EVIDENCE -- [evidence]

### Tests
- Tests written: N
- Tests passing: N/N
- Commands: `[exact command]`

### Known Gaps
- [anything deferred or uncertain]

### Risks
- [anything that could break other parts]

Read the full file on GitHub · 142 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 3d ago First seen · 142 lines · 26 tokens per session scan A 96b00a1caec9

Subscribe to this mod's changes

workflows-work is a skill published in the GitHub repository Kastalien-Research/thoughtbox (64 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 26 tokens to every session and 985 once invoked, about $0.0001 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.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

reasoning

Use BEFORE answering analytical, diagnostic, planning, or multi-step reasoning questions. Trigger phrases include "should I X or Y", "why is X happening", "what's the best approach", "what are the tradeoffs", "help me think through", "diagnose", "root cause", "plan/design X", "what are the implications of", "compare…

ejentum/ejentum-mcp · 186 tokens

xcodebuildmcp-structured-output-review

Use when reviewing XcodeBuildMCP structured output schema changes, schema versioning, manifest outputSchema metadata, and JSON fixture compatibility.

getsentry/XcodeBuildMCP · 37 tokens

opik-diagnose

Surface the Opik traces worth a developer's attention, ranked by signal — errors, failed tool calls, latency, regressions, and low online-eval scores — plus Diagnostics issues. Reads live/production traces via the SDK (searchtraces and agentinsights) and works with no MCP; uses the MCP issue entity when connected.…

comet-ml/opik-mcp · 147 tokens

cortex-automate

Set up automation — prospective memory triggers, neuro-symbolic rules, and CLAUDE.md sync. Use when the user says 'remind me when', 'trigger when', 'create a rule', 'auto-remember', 'sync to CLAUDE.md', 'push insights', 'set up trigger', 'when I open this file', 'when this keyword appears', or when you want to…

cdeust/Cortex · 93 tokens

tabnexus-mcp-evals

Generate, validate, and run isolated Codex-to-TabNexus MCP evaluations with a curated 600-query dataset, executable gold tool labels, safety checks, and best-of-three stability scoring. Use when testing TabNexus MCP tool coverage, Agent behavior, regression quality, destructive-action safety, prompt changes, or a…

KaichenCurry/TabNexus · 75 tokens

compare

Structured comparison of 2+ alternatives with consistent criteria and decision matrix.

n24q02m/wet-mcp · 15 tokens