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/lugassawan/swe-workbench/workflow-developmentnpx skills add lugassawan/swe-workbench --skill workflow-developmentgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/lugassawan/swe-workbenchWrote 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/lugassawan/swe-workbench/workflow-development)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/lugassawan/swe-workbench/workflow-development"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/lugassawan/swe-workbench/workflow-development.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 | $0.00172 | $0.04528 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00086 | $0.02264 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00034 | $0.00906 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00017 | $0.00453 |
Grade A, and why
workflow-development 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 2d 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 — 244 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Development Workflow
Single source of truth for how development work flows. Three modes:
- Mode A (Plan Writing): Embed a
## Workflowsection into plans usingtemplates/plan-workflow-section.md - Mode B (Implementation): Guide step-by-step execution through all 5 phases
- Mode C (Orchestration): Coordinate multiple parallel agents across dependency rounds — see
orchestration.md
Announce at start: "I'm using the development skill to [write the workflow section / guide this implementation]."
When This Skill Activates
- Mode A: Writing or finalizing an implementation plan (before
ExitPlanMode) - Mode B: User says "implement this", "build this", "execute this plan", "run the implementation plan end to end" — any branch → code → deliver flow. For focused bug diagnosis prefer
/swe-workbench:debug(invokes thedebuggersubagent, which composessuperpowers:systematic-debugging); escalate here when the fix needs the full 5-phase lifecycle.- Prefer entering here rather than calling
superpowers:executing-plansdirectly — Phase 2 already delegates to it while adding the surrounding Branch → Verify → Review → Deliver lifecycle.
- Prefer entering here rather than calling
- Mode C: User says "orchestrate these issues", "run in parallel", multi-issue campaigns with >3 issues
Sub-Skill Integration Map
Mode B — Single Implementation:
Phase 1 (Branch) → enter existing worktree if one matches, else rimba add <task> (rimba) OR superpowers:using-git-worktrees (fallback)
Phase 2 (Implement) → superpowers:executing-plans OR superpowers:subagent-driven-development
└─ swe-workbench:principle-tdd (per unit)
└─ swe-workbench:workflow-delegated-implementation (scope/complexity warrants isolation)
Phase 3 (Verify) → superpowers:verification-before-completion
Phase 4 (Review) → BOTH in parallel (neither optional):
├─ superpowers:requesting-code-review (Skill — plan-alignment)
└─ swe-workbench:reviewer (subagent — diff correctness/security/design)
Phase 5 (Deliver) → swe-workbench:workflow-commit-and-pr
Mode C — Orchestration: see orchestration.md
What ships with it
4 files 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.
- 2d ago First seen · 244 lines · 172 tokens per session scan A e85bbc829677
workflow-development is a skill published in the GitHub repository lugassawan/swe-workbench (2 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 172 tokens to every session and 4,528 once invoked, about $0.0009 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
release
Cut a brooks-lint release: set the version in package.json, propagate it across all four plugin manifests and every version-bearing text file (README badges, docs site metadata), write the CHANGELOG entry, validate, then commit, push, tag, and publish the GitHub release. Triggers when the maintainer asks to "release"…
brooks-audit
Architecture audit that maps module dependencies, checks layering integrity, and flags structural decay across a codebase, drawing on twelve classic engineering books. Triggers when: user asks to audit architecture, review folder/module structure, check for circular imports, understand how the codebase is organized…
brooks-test
Test quality review drawing on twelve classic engineering books — with primary focus on xUnit Test Patterns, The Art of Unit Testing, How Google Tests Software, and Working Effectively with Legacy Code — that diagnoses structural problems in an existing test suite: brittleness, mock abuse, coverage illusions, slow…
new-pattern
Guided workflow to create a new pattern following the project template and quality standards. Walks through topic validation, source verification, implementation, exercises, challenge questions, and bilingual docs.
skill-review
Deep behavioral audit of a Lattice skill — proposes 3 review personas relevant to the skill, runs independent scenario analysis from each persona's perspective, then merges only the high-confidence, practical findings into a severity-ordered gap report with proposed fixes. Structural validation (conventions…
context-anchoring
Manage per-feature living documents that capture decisions, constraints, and reasoning across AI sessions during active development. Scoped to feature-level work — design, implementation, bugfix, refactor — not for codebase-wide assessments or product-wide specifications (those define their own document lifecycles).…