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 morodomi/dev-crew --skill orchestrategit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/morodomi/dev-crewWrote 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/morodomi/dev-crew/orchestrate)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/morodomi/dev-crew/orchestrate"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/morodomi/dev-crew/orchestrate/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/morodomi/dev-crew/orchestrate"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/morodomi/dev-crew/orchestrate.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" 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 | $0.00104 | $0.01816 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00052 | $0.00908 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00021 | $0.00363 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00182 |
Grade A, and why
orchestrate 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 5d 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 — 99 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Current State
!ls -t docs/cycles/*.md 2>/dev/null | head -5 || echo "(none)"
!git log --oneline -5 2>/dev/null || echo "(no commits)"
TDD Orchestrate (PdM Mode)
TDDサイクル全体をPdM (Product Manager) として管理。plan mode起点でワークフロー制御。
Progress Checklist
orchestrate Progress:
- [ ] Block 0: planファイル / Cycle doc 確認 → 開始地点決定
- [ ] Block 1: sync-plan (with Design Review) → 自律判断
- [ ] Block 2a: RED — Task(red-worker) でテスト作成、失敗確認
- [ ] Block 2b: GREEN — Task(green-worker) で実装、全テストPASS確認
- [ ] Block 2c: REFACTOR — Skill(refactor) で品質改善
- [ ] Block 2c.5: VERIFY — Product Verification (advisory, skip if absent)
- [ ] Block 2d: REVIEW — Skill(review --code) でコードレビュー → 自律判断
- [ ] Block 2e: DISCOVERED — スコープ外項目をissue起票
- [ ] Block 2f: RETROSPECTIVE — Skill(dev-crew:cycle-retrospective) で失敗-成功 insight 抽出
- [ ] Block 3: COMMIT → 完了
PdM の原則
- 自分で実装・テスト・レビューしない → 専門 Teammate/Subagent に委譲
- PASS/WARN → 自動進行、BLOCK → 再試行 → ユーザーに報告
- 曖昧なまま進まない → AskUserQuestion で確認
Workflow
Block 0: Prerequisite Check
0. Codify gate — frontmatter-only scan:
for f in docs/cycles/*.md; do awk '/^---$/{c++;next} c==1{print}' "$f" | grep -q 'retro_status: captured' && echo "$f"; done
非空 → Skill(dev-crew:codify-insight) 起動。既定は自動 triage、skill 候補/低確信のみ 1 回確認。exit 0 (全 resolved) → 次へ。exit 1 (abort) → BLOCK、/orchestrate 再起動を案内。空 → no-op。
最初に実行: TaskCreate でタスクを登録。詳細: reference.md
planファイルを起点に開始地点を決定する:
- planファイルあり?
→ YES: 未完了 cycle doc あり? plan-review 記録+architect Post-Transfer Verification 記録あり → Block 2a / sync-plan 済みだが architect 未実施 → Block 1（architect のみ再開、resume gap 対策）/ いずれも未実施 → Progress Log 再開 / cycle doc なし → Block 1
→ NO: 新規開始 (plan mode):
Skill(dev-crew:spec)→ 設計・Test List →Skill(dev-crew:review, args: "--plan")→ Step 8（承認前 Codex plan review、plan mode 内で完了済み） → approve → Block 1
Block 1: Sync-Plan (with Design Review)
Codex plan review は承認前（spec Step 8）に完了済みの前提で進行する。順序: sync-plan（転記）→ architect（転記後検証）。
- sync-plan: plan の Plan Review Record を Cycle doc へ転記し、Cycle doc を生成
- architect: 転記後検証（Post-Transfer Verification）を実施。転記欠落=BLOCK / scope 実質変更=AskUserQuestion で再承認 / 観察のみ=DISCOVERED
- Codex不在時: Socrates adversarial review —
which codex失敗時、Socrates を計画への adversarial reviewer として起動。詳細: reference.md - codex_mode / 委譲モード: RED/GREEN の委譲先はユーザー選択を優先。詳細: reference.md
- 自律判断: PASS/WARN → Block 2a へ、BLOCK → sync-plan再実行
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.
- 5d ago First seen · 99 lines · 104 tokens per session scan A f041d7f1dec7
orchestrate is a skill published in the GitHub repository morodomi/dev-crew (1 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 104 tokens to every session and 1,816 once invoked, about $0.0005 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
writing-plans
Use when you have a spec or requirements for a multi-step task, before touching code.
test-driven-development
Use when implementing any feature or bugfix, before writing implementation code.
x-qdev
A compact development workflow for a small, clearly defined code change. It keeps the requirement, initially failing tests, implementation, and real verification results in one task document, following TDD, or test-driven development.
develop-small-feature
Implement a small, well-scoped feature or fix end-to-end from spec to PR — reuse or create a feature branch, implement test-first, run static checks, get user verification, commit, then open a PR to main.
tdd
Use when building any T3 feature or bugfix, recommended for T2 on the affected path — write the failing test before the implementation, one behavior at a time, through public interfaces.
test-driven-development
Runs a recorded red-green-refactor cycle. Use when implementing a feature, bug fix, or behavior change.