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 nurettincoban/ai-prd-workflow --skill workflow-statusgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/nurettincoban/ai-prd-workflowWrote 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/nurettincoban/ai-prd-workflow/workflow-status)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/nurettincoban/ai-prd-workflow/workflow-status"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/nurettincoban/ai-prd-workflow/workflow-status/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/nurettincoban/ai-prd-workflow/workflow-status"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/nurettincoban/ai-prd-workflow/workflow-status.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 | $0.00027 | $0.01035 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00414 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00207 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00103 |
Grade A, and why
workflow-status 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 23d 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.
What it actually says
You are guiding a project through an RFC-driven development workflow with these stages:
| # | Stage | Artifact | Command / Prompt |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0 | Document an existing codebase (instead of stages 1, 3 and 4) | PRD.md, FEATURES.md, RULES.md | /document-existing (document-existing-prompt.md) |
| 1 | Create PRD | PRD.md | /create-prd (interactive-prd-creation-prompt.md) |
| 2 | Verify PRD | PRD.md (improved) + PRD-REVIEW.md | /verify-prd (prd-comprehensive-verification-prompt.md) |
| 3 | Extract features | FEATURES.md | /extract-features (prd-to-features-prompt.md) |
| 4 | Generate rules | RULES.md | /generate-rules (prd-to-rules-prompt.md) |
| 5 | Generate RFCs | RFCs/ folder + RFCS.md | /generate-rfcs (prd-to-rfcs-prompt.md) |
| 6 | Testing strategy | TEST-STRATEGY.md | /test-strategy (testing-strategy-prompt.md) |
| 7 | Implement RFCs (each once its declared predecessors are done) | Code | /implement-rfc <id> (implementation-prompt-template.md) |
| 8 | Review each implementation | reviews/REVIEW-RFC-<id>.md |
/review-rfc <id> (code-review-prompt.md) |
| 9 | Manage changes (whenever requirements move) | changes/CHANGE-REQUEST-<nnn>.md |
/manage-changes (prd-change-management-prompt.md) |
| 10 | Status check (anytime) | this report | /workflow-status (workflow-status-prompt.md) |
Stage 6 comes before stage 7 deliberately: a test plan written after the code is a coverage audit, not a plan.
Inspect the current project to determine workflow progress. If trace-check.py is available -- in a scripts/ folder beside these instructions, or in the project's own scripts/ folder -- run it on the project first (python3 <path>/trace-check.py .): it checks IDs, coverage, RFC dependencies and review records mechanically, and its FAIL lines belong in your Inconsistencies section.
- Which artifacts exist: PRD.md, PRD-REVIEW.md, FEATURES.md, RULES.md, RFCS.md, RFCs/ folder, TEST-STRATEGY.md, reviews/, changes/?
- Which RFCs are implemented? Start from the Status column in RFCS.md, which
/implement-rfcand/review-rfckeep current, then verify it: spot-check the acceptance criteria of every RFC it marks Implemented or Reviewed against the actual code, and report any status the code does not support. Do not assume an RFC is done just because code exists, or because the column says so. - Which RFCs have been reviewed? Check
reviews/for a report per implemented RFC — an implemented RFC with no review is the most common real-world gap, and reviews are exactly what gets skipped under deadline. - Are there open change requests in
changes/whose decisions are still pending? - Any signs of drift: code that contradicts the PRD or RULES.md, features in the codebase with no RFC, an RFC implemented before its declared predecessors, deviations in code that the RFC's Implementation Notes do not record?
If you cannot inspect files directly, ask me to describe or paste the artifacts before reporting.
Then report:
-
Status table — each workflow stage with its artifact and status (Done / In progress / Missing / Stale)
-
Per-RFC progress — implementation and review status side by side, one row per RFC:
RFC-001 implemented ✅ reviewed ❌ RFC-002 implemented ✅ reviewed ❌ RFC-003 implemented ✅ reviewed ✅A single "reviews done" row hides which RFCs were actually reviewed. Report them individually.
-
Inconsistencies — anything drifted, skipped, or contradictory, with file references
-
Next step — the single recommended next action, with the exact command or prompt to run
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- 23d ago First seen · 52 lines · 27 tokens per session scan A 2b441c23abbb
workflow-status is a skill published in the GitHub repository nurettincoban/ai-prd-workflow (305 stars, last pushed 17d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 27 tokens to every session and 1,035 once invoked, about $0.0001 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 2026-10-02.
Other skills, from other repositories
hmem-new-project
Create a new P-entry (project) in hmem via createproject — handles schema, section setup, and O-entry linking. Use when the user asks to add/register/track a new project ('neues Projekt', 'P-Entry erstellen'), or before any writememory with prefix='P'.
hmem-activate
Switch active project mid-session via loadproject, then fix any misrouted O-entry exchanges. Use when the user says 'aktiviere/lade Projekt X', 'switch to project Y', or whenever you'd otherwise call loadproject mid-session.
setup-project
Onboards a new developer - explains the project, runs setup steps, verifies everything works.
fix-issue
GitHub issue numarasını alır, okur ve otomatik olarak çözer.
enhance-prompt
Transform raw prompts into professional-grade, codebase-aware instructions. Use when improving vague/incomplete prompts, adding codebase context to requests, rewriting instructions with structured sections, or crafting detailed prompts like a professional prompt engineer. Supports auto-category detection, prompt chain…
writing-a-status-update
Use when drafting a recurring stakeholder update (weekly status, monthly report, project update).