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 navapbc/digital-service-orchestra/plugin install dsoWrote 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/navapbc/digital-service-orchestra/implementation-plan)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/navapbc/digital-service-orchestra/implementation-plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/navapbc/digital-service-orchestra/implementation-plan/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/navapbc/digital-service-orchestra/implementation-plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/navapbc/digital-service-orchestra/implementation-plan.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 | $0.00132 | $0.26344 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00066 | $0.13172 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00026 | $0.05269 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00013 | $0.02634 |
Grade A, and why
implementation-plan scanned grade A with 1 finding 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 7d 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.
Makes network callslowCapability
Not a fault in itself. Listed so you know the mod talks to something, and to what.
prompt: "You are a behavioral coverage validator. For each DD below, determine whether the Verify command invokes the code under test (PASS) or only checks file/string existence (FAIL).\n\nA command FAILS if it matches a How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 1,618 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
The skill dispatches its own sub-agents (dso:approach-proposer, dso:approach-decision-maker, dso:task-decomposer, opus gap-analysis on COMPLEX). Running implementation-plan ITSELF as a sub-agent means those dispatches become nested Task calls — which CLAUDE.md rule:no-nested-task forbids, and which the platform surfaces as [Tool result missing due to internal error], silently losing the plan output.
If you detect that this skill is running as a sub-agent, STOP immediately and return verbatim:
ERROR: /dso:implementation-plan must be invoked at the orchestrator level, not as a sub-agent.
REASON: This skill dispatches sub-agents internally; nesting would violate rule:no-nested-task.
CALLER ACTION: Return control to your orchestrator and have IT invoke /dso:implementation-plan
directly (via the Skill tool, not the Agent/Task tool).
Do NOT proceed with any of the Phase A/B/C steps. Do NOT dispatch any further sub-agents. Do NOT produce a partial plan.
Proxy detection (best-effort): if the Agent tool is unavailable in your context (<available_tools> does not list Agent / Task), you are running as a sub-agent — refuse per above. If the Agent tool IS available, that is a necessary but not sufficient signal that you are at the orchestrator level; if the orchestrator's most recent user-facing turn does not match the trigger phrases for this skill (per the description: frontmatter), and you were invoked via Skill tool by an upstream skill rather than by the user directly, treat the invocation as suspect and prefer to STOP-and-return rather than proceed.
Caller-side enforcement: orchestrators that detect the ERROR return from this skill MUST halt their own progression rather than swallow the ERROR and continue — silently continuing produces a broken plan with missing sub-agent outputs.
Implementation Plan: Atomic Task Generation
Generate a production-safe implementation plan for a User Story by decomposing it into atomic, TDD-driven tasks with correct dependencies. Prioritize understanding over assumptions — resolve ambiguity before planning.
What ships with it
11 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.
- docs/review-criteria.md 5.8 KB
- docs/reviewers/architectural/best-practices.md 5.3 KB
- docs/reviewers/architectural/justification.md 4.4 KB
- docs/reviewers/architectural/project-alignment.md 5.4 KB
- docs/reviewers/plan/completeness.md 8.4 KB
- docs/reviewers/plan/dependencies.md 3.3 KB
- docs/reviewers/plan/safety.md 3.6 KB
- docs/reviewers/plan/task-design.md 6.6 KB
- docs/reviewers/plan/tdd.md 12 KB
- prompts/gap-analysis.md 7.8 KB
- prompts/proposal-schema.md 6.0 KB
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 1,618 lines · 132 tokens per session scan A ed0116f9cf4d
implementation-plan is a skill published in the GitHub repository navapbc/digital-service-orchestra (6 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 132 tokens to every session and 26,344 once invoked, about $0.0007 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (makes network calls). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
engram-testing-coverage
TDD and coverage standards for Engram. Trigger: When implementing behavior changes in any package.
iterative-development
TDD iteration loops using Claude Code Stop hooks - runs tests after each response, feeds failures back automatically.
python
Python development with ruff, mypy, pytest - TDD and type safety.
nw-fp-clojure
Clojure language-specific patterns, data-first modeling, REPL-driven development, and spec.
strict-tdd
Strict RED->GREEN->REFACTOR test-driven development with enforcement. Never write production code before a failing test. Atomic commits per TDD cycle.
mobiai-mobile-tdd
You MUST use this before writing any implementation code for a mobile feature, bug fix, refactor, or behavior change. Tests come before implementation — no exceptions.