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/mvschwarz/openrig/delegating-worknpx skills add mvschwarz/openrig --skill delegating-workgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/mvschwarz/openrigWrote 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/mvschwarz/openrig/delegating-work)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/mvschwarz/openrig/delegating-work"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/mvschwarz/openrig/delegating-work.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 | $0.00120 | $0.00933 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00060 | $0.00466 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00024 | $0.00187 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00093 |
Grade A, and why
delegating-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 4d 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 — 44 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Delegating work — who should do this task?
The core question: context performance
Getting work done well is a context problem. The agent best suited to a task is the one who already holds the context that task requires. Before you spawn a subagent or grind it out yourself, ask who that is.
The decision
Ask: how much would a blank slate have to read in before it could do this correctly?
- A lot to read in → route to a real agent in the topology that already holds it. This is what the role structure is FOR — reviewers, QA, implementers who have been on a project over time. An agent that already understands the work produces a better, safer result than any amount of briefing.
- A little — a prompt plus light grounding is enough → spawn a subagent.
- Genuinely unsure → err toward a real agent, or do it yourself.
Subagents are underused — reach for them far more
For self-contained work that is fully specifiable in the prompt, spawn a subagent instead of spending your own context: tracing, research, grounding passes, summarizing, scanning log files, searching, fetching, web search, mechanical extraction with citations. This is the common shape and it is under-used.
The failure mode — the part that matters most
Subagents start as blank slates, and you cannot anticipate everything they need to know. Give one a task where there is a lot to understand and it will have blind spots it does not know it has — it will complete the task and return a false conclusion, not from weakness but because it lacked the context to know what "correct" even looked like.
This is the unknown-unknowns problem, and it is the single most common subagent failure: a poorly-contextualized summary is worse than no summary, because it arrives looking like an answer. Overreliance on subagents for context-heavy work causes more problems than it solves — and a team burned by it stops using subagents at all, which is the wrong correction. The fix is not "avoid subagents"; it is "match the task to the context it needs."
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.
- 4d ago First seen · 44 lines · 120 tokens per session scan A 9809781b3ee8
delegating-work is a skill published in the GitHub repository mvschwarz/openrig (65 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 120 tokens to every session and 933 once invoked, about $0.0006 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.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoprompt
Explicit-only useful-first orchestration. Invoke only when the user names autoprompt - typed as /autoprompt or in plain language such as "act in autoprompt mode" - to turn a mission into one executable roadmap, build dependency-safe lanes, and verify the result with independent reviewers. Do not infer invocation from…
autoprompt
Explicit-only useful-first orchestration. Invoke /autoprompt to turn a mission into one executable roadmap, build dependency-safe lanes, and verify the result with independent reviewers. Never infer invocation from ordinary requests. Never resume from leftover artifacts without an explicit resume instruction.
autoprompt
Explicit-only useful-first orchestration. Invoke /autoprompt to turn a mission into one executable roadmap, build dependency-safe lanes, and verify the result with independent reviewers. Never infer invocation from ordinary requests. Never resume from leftover artifacts without an explicit resume instruction.
ap-implementer
L3 executor - G4 IMPLEMENT. Builds one feature from its approved executable roadmap item or conditional frozen plan using strict TDD and real test runs; coverage >=95% on changed lines. Reports PLAN-CONFLICT rather than improvising.
ap-execharness-resolver
L3 executor - EXECHARNESS RESOLVE. Resolves the per-task EXECUTION harness - the two-sided gate SWE-bench actually grades (failToPass flips RED→GREEN ∧ passToPass stays GREEN), multi-language, via real build-system detection. Ingests shipped FAILTOPASS/PASSTOPASS, else derives failToPass from the mission's behavioral…
ap-feature-coordinator
L1 feature coordinator - drives approved ROADMAP.md lanes through their required build/review/verification gates and owns the run-wide feature frontier.