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 n8n-io/n8n --skill planninggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/n8n-io/n8nWrote 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/n8n-io/n8n/planning)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/n8n-io/n8n/planning"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/n8n-io/n8n/planning/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/n8n-io/n8n/planning"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/n8n-io/n8n/planning.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00088 | $0.02215 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00035 | $0.00886 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00443 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00221 |
Grade A, and why
planning 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.
The source is not reproduced here
A licence we could not identify
The repository carries a LICENSE file, but it is custom or dual enough that GitHub cannot name it and neither can this catalogue. Unknown terms are not permission, so the body is not copied here. Read the licence at the source and decide for yourself.
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 Changed · +1 tokens per session 39042e6a9408
- 6d ago Changed · +2 lines 5e9d0ae1f613
- 18d ago Changed · -1 tokens per session 02f92901cf49
- 1mo ago Changed · +3 lines 99a1d9d7e3f3
- 1mo ago First seen · 194 lines · 88 tokens per session scan A 626dde381368
planning is a skill published in the GitHub repository n8n-io/n8n (208,412 stars, last pushed today), with no licence file. It adds 88 tokens to every session and 2,215 once invoked, about $0.0004 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
code-review
Use when reviewing a diff, PR, or patch for bugs, regressions, missing tests, architecture risk, security risk, or reviewability concerns before merge.
receiving-code-review
Use when addressing code review or QA feedback, especially when the feedback is unclear, broad, or technically questionable.
code-simplification
Simplifies code for clarity. Use when refactoring code for clarity without changing behavior. Use when code works but is harder to read, maintain, or extend than it should be. Use when reviewing code that has accumulated unnecessary complexity.
review-implement-phase
Implements triaged review actions, commits focused fixes, and posts Done plus resolves threads. Use when the user wants only the implementation phase of the review-framework workflow.
performance-lint-rules
Performance review guidance for Oxc linter rule implementations. Use only when reviewing Rust rule code under crates/oxclinter/src/rules/ or when explicitly auditing those rules for performance improvements.
verify-change
A change-checking skill that reviews code differences and checks whether related documentation, tests, and records were updated.