Getting it into your agent
This one installs as part of its plugin. Adding the marketplace and installing the plugin brings it with everything else the plugin ships.
/plugin marketplace add matheusPavaneli/workbench/plugin install 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/matheuspavaneli/workbench/frame-product)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/matheuspavaneli/workbench/frame-product"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/matheuspavaneli/workbench/frame-product.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 | $0.00050 | $0.00734 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00025 | $0.00367 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00147 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00073 |
Grade A, and why
frame-product scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 6d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 64 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
frame-product
python "${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/lib/wb.py" <args>
The entry here is an idea, not a ticket. The output is a decision someone can disagree with, or a ticket worth planning. Deciding to not build it is a successful outcome.
Steps
-
Get the bar.
repo profile. Onsolo-saasandstartupthe product case is part of the work. Onscaleupandenterprisea product owner makes this call — offer the framing, do not make the decision for them. -
Answer these, in writing. An answer of "unknown" is legitimate and more useful than a guess dressed up as a fact:
- Who has this problem, and how do you know? Named users, support tickets, or churn reasons — not a persona invented for the answer.
- What do they do today instead? If the workaround is fine, that is the finding.
- Which metric moves, and roughly how much. One metric. "Engagement" is not one.
- What does it cost — build time, cost per user per month, and the support load it creates. A feature that generates recurring tickets costs more than the sprint that shipped it.
- Does it change pricing or a plan limit? That is a different decision, and a slower one.
- What breaks if it succeeds — the load, the edge cases, the operational burden. One operator cannot be on call for a queue.
-
Cut it down. State the smallest slice that tests the belief, not the complete feature. Manual before automated, one plan before all plans, one region before all regions. Then say what the full version would be, so the cut is visible rather than accidental.
-
Check it against the code. Does something similar already exist? An idea that is a config change is not a project.
${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/shared/code-search.md. -
Write
.workflow/idea-<slug>/frame.mdwith those answers, the chosen slice, and a recommendation: build now, build later (with what would change your mind), or do not build (with why).
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 · 64 lines · 50 tokens per session scan A bca9f89fd593
frame-product is a skill published in the GitHub repository matheusPavaneli/workbench (1 stars, last pushed 14d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 50 tokens to every session and 734 once invoked, about $0.0003 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
integration-rule-engine
A declarative routing engine that turns ticket / error attributes (reporter, label, project, area path, error class, environment) into a tag + AI agent + priority assignment, so cross-source workflows ("security tickets always go to the OWASP reviewer") stay out of code and in user-editable rules.
stale-ticket-triage
Replace the weekly "look at every ticket older than X days" meeting with a scheduled AI scan that picks close / snooze / keep per ticket plus a one-sentence reason, so a PM can bulk-approve in 90 seconds Monday morning.
feature-execution
This skill should be used when the user asks to "orchestrate the feature", "run the phases", "resume implementation", "continue the plan", "the phase agent died", "the agent stopped on its usage limit", "accept this phase", "can these phases run in parallel", "is this phase done", "does this shortfall matter", or…
dev-kit-setup
First-use bootstrap for the dev kit. Detects the team's issue tracker, discovers what it can via MCP/CLI, asks only what cannot be discovered, and persists the result to .claude/dev-kit.json in the consuming repo. Use when that file is missing, when the user asks to set up or reconfigure the kit, or when issue-fetch…
pr-review
Structured review of a pull request or the current diff - correctness, contract drift, security, missing tests, coverage gate - producing classified findings and a verdict. Use when the user asks to review a PR or diff, or as the self-review step of the story workflow.
acceptance-agent
Use this agent when a zforge phase has reported DONE and its evidence must be independently verified before the planner accepts it. Typical triggers include $zforge:feature-orchestrate accepting a REPORTED phase during a long chain, and any run where the planner's context is the constrained resource. It reconciles the…