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/plan-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/navapbc/digital-service-orchestra/plan-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/navapbc/digital-service-orchestra/plan-review/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/plan-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/navapbc/digital-service-orchestra/plan-review.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 | $0.00140 | $0.01323 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00056 | $0.00529 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00028 | $0.00265 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00132 |
Grade A, and why
plan-review 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 2mo 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 — 118 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Plan Review
Orchestrator-level skill that dispatches a dso:plan-review sub-agent to review plans and designs before the user sees them. This skill runs at the orchestrator level — it is NOT itself dispatched as a sub-agent (the SUB-AGENT-GUARD above enforces this).
When to Invoke
MANDATORY before any of these:
- Presenting a design doc to the user for approval (brainstorming skill)
- Presenting an implementation plan to the user (writing-plans skill)
- Calling
ExitPlanMode(plan mode)
The hook on ExitPlanMode enforces this mechanically. For brainstorming and writing-plans, this is skill-enforced.
Parameters
| Parameter | Required | Default | Description |
|---|---|---|---|
artifact_type |
Yes | — | "design" or "implementation_plan" |
artifact_path |
Yes | — | Path to the plan/design file, or inline content |
Process
Step 1: Dispatch Review Sub-Agent
Launch a single sub-agent with the plan content and review rubric.
Model selection:
artifact_type: "design"→opus(architectural reasoning)artifact_type: "implementation_plan"→sonnet(structural analysis)
Sub-agent prompt: Read and fill placeholders in ${CLAUDE_PLUGIN_ROOT}/docs/workflows/prompts/plan-review-dispatch.md. Replace {artifact_type} and {artifact content} with actual values.
Inline dispatch is required — dso:plan-review is an agent file identifier, NOT a valid subagent_type value. The Agent tool only accepts built-in types (general-purpose, Explore, Plan, etc.). Read agents/plan-review.md inline and dispatch as subagent_type: "general-purpose" with the model below.
Launch with:
Agent tool:
subagent_type: "general-purpose"
model: opus (design) or sonnet (implementation_plan)
# Model rationale: design needs trade-off reasoning across architectural
# coherence (opus); implementation_plan needs structured analysis of task
# atomicity / dependency graph / TDD discipline (sonnet — haiku misses
# implicit coupling).
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.
- 2mo ago First seen · 118 lines · 140 tokens per session scan A e131c233c875
plan-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository navapbc/digital-service-orchestra (6 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 140 tokens to every session and 1,323 once invoked, about $0.0006 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 2026-09-03.
plan-review compared with skills from other repositories
| Mod | Type | Stars | Last push | Licence | Scan | Tokens | Works with |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| plan-reviewnavapbc/digital-service-orchestra | Skill | 6 | yesterday | Apache-2.0 | A | 140 | Claude Code |
| autoreviewopenclaw/clawhub | Skill | 9.6k | today | MIT | A | 17 | Claude Code, Codex |
| omh-code-reviewrlaope/oh-my-hermes | Skill | 5.4k | today | MIT | A | 49 | Claude Code, Codex |
| agent-teams-simplify-and-hardenLeoYeAI/openclaw-master-skills | Skill | 2.2k | 5d ago | MIT | A | 115 | Claude Code, Codex |
| revdiff-planumputun/revdiff | Skill | 951 | today | MIT | A | 84 | Claude Code |
| re0-mergeLilMGenius/paperthin | Skill | 1.4k | today | MIT | A | 51 | Claude Code, Codex |
| explore-unknownsdzhng/skills | Skill | 1.5k | yesterday | MIT | A | 162 | Claude Code, Codex |