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 LerianStudio/ring --skill dispatching-workflowsgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/LerianStudio/ringWrote 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/lerianstudio/ring/dispatching-workflows)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/lerianstudio/ring/dispatching-workflows"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/lerianstudio/ring/dispatching-workflows/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/lerianstudio/ring/dispatching-workflows"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/lerianstudio/ring/dispatching-workflows.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to medium
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- medium Excessive Agency · line 167 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
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 | $0.00142 | $0.03156 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00057 | $0.01262 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00028 | $0.00631 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00316 |
Grade A, and why
ring:dispatching-workflows 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 — 181 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Dispatching Workflows
When to use
- A phased plan exists (typically from ring:writing-plans) and you want each phase executed by a multi-agent harness, not a single subagent
- You want review and an adversarial contrarian pass baked inside every wave — verified work returns, unverified work does not
- Work benefits from phase checkpoints and supervisor course-correction between phases
Skip when
- One supervised subagent per wave is enough → ring:executing-plans (lighter; the supervisor reviews after the wave returns)
- Production work needing the full gated specialist roster and Gate 0/8/9 → ring:running-dev-cycle
- No plan exists yet → ring:writing-plans first
- Plan covers multiple independent subsystems → split into separate plans before executing
Sequence
Runs after: ring:writing-plans (consumes and updates its living plan document) Alternatives: ring:executing-plans (one supervised subagent per wave — lighter), ring:running-dev-cycle (full gated specialist cycle — heavier)
Related
Companion skills: ring:writing-plans (Task Format + phase-epic-task hierarchy used during elaboration), ring:test-driven-development (RED→GREEN per task, inside the harness), ring:committing-changes (closes each task with a signed atomic commit), ring:reviewing-code (the full 9+ reviewer pool — run it at plan close or for a high-stakes phase)
The loop: elaborate the current phase into tasks against the real landed code → launch the phase as one workflow that implements, reviews, and contrarian-verifies internally → the workflow returns verified work → review it as supervisor → phase checkpoint → roll to the next phase → repeat. The main agent stays the supervisor; the workflow is a multi-agent harness, not a lone implementer. The plan document is the living source of truth — elaboration writes tasks back into it.
Announce at start: "Using ring:dispatching-workflows to execute this plan phase-by-phase as reviewed multi-agent workflows."
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 · 181 lines · 142 tokens per session scan A faed759b45bd
ring:dispatching-workflows is a skill published in the GitHub repository LerianStudio/ring (217 stars, last pushed 3d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 142 tokens to every session and 3,156 once invoked, about $0.0006 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
retro
Engineering retrospective from git metrics. Reports deployment frequency, release cycle span, churn hotspots, backlog health. Outputs narrative report with 3+ actionable items. Flags: --since, --path, explicit range argument.
backlog
Manage the project's tech debt backlog. Add, list, fix, wontfix, delete, prioritize, and suggest batch actions on tracked issues. Used by audit and review skills to persist findings, and directly by users to manage accumulated debt. Modes: list [category], add [description], fix B-{N}, wontfix B-{N} [reason], delete…
issue-creation
Trigger: issue creation, bug reports, feature requests, or issue approval. Create and triage GitHub issues from repository evidence.
systemic-issue-triage
Trigger: new issue, bug report, triage, backlog, issue flood, community report, root cause, dead-end, blocked user. Attack issues by root class, never one-by-one; fixes must shrink the system, not grow it.
publish-artifacts-to-r3
Publish HTML pages, documents, files, or code changes to r3 for human review, and respond to feedback on existing r3 artifacts. Use when the user asks to use r3 or supplies an r3 artifact or feedback command.
revert
Git-aware revert that understands Draft tracks, phases, and tasks. Safely undo work at task, phase, or track level. Use when the user asks to 'revert this track', 'undo a phase', 'revert task X', or says 'roll back the last task', 'undo this work'.