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 okisdev/claude-code-fusion --skill panelgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/okisdev/claude-code-fusionWrote 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/okisdev/claude-code-fusion/panel)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/okisdev/claude-code-fusion/panel"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/okisdev/claude-code-fusion/panel/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/okisdev/claude-code-fusion/panel"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/okisdev/claude-code-fusion/panel.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 | $0.00034 | $0.01464 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00014 | $0.00586 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00293 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00146 |
Grade A, and why
panel 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 5d 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 — 58 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Convene a blind multi-model panel on the decision below. In the standard external panel, every engine receives the same neutral brief, works with no knowledge of the other panelists, and you adjudicate the returned verdicts.
Decision or question to adjudicate:
$ARGUMENTS
Compose the brief:
- Write ONE neutral, self contained brief containing: the decision or question, the constraints that bound the answer, the relevant file paths, and explicit coverage or acceptance criteria for what a good answer must address. Collection review verifies this consultation brief; it does not need a shell verification command. Its first line is the single routing header required by policy and includes
lane: panel,grok-role: independence(one of the four permitted Grok roles), and the explicit acceptance criteria; the shared routing header is also included in the identical prompt sent to Codex. - Never include a candidate answer, a leaning, any prior model opinion, or any context from this conversation. The panel is blind; a brief that hints at a preferred answer is invalid.
- End the brief with: "This is a consultation. Analyze and recommend; do not modify any files."
- Keep the exact brief in the Agent calls and pass it directly as each Agent prompt. Do not create a transport file, temp brief, or plugin-data payload with Write. Companion adapters own any private staging required by their transports. Panel consultations do not use isolated implementation worktrees or a Codex only
--cwdprefix because either would violate the identical brief invariant. - If the request is too thin to build a self contained brief, ask the user for the missing constraints before launching.
Launch the panel:
- In one tool message, invoke
grok:grok-rescueandcodex:codex-rescuewith the identical brief as their direct prompt. Use plaingrok-rescueorcodex-rescueif the namespaced form is not found. Do not setrun_in_background; parallel tool calls provide overlap while each result remains owned and collected. - Never set background mode on the Codex Agent and never add
--backgroundto its brief. Complexity, expected duration, and model choice do not change this rule. - Add
cursor:cursor-rescueas a third parallel track only when the user asks for a wider panel. Its copy of the identical brief addscursor-role: diversityto the routing header, and its leading companion options pick a model from a family that is neither the orchestrator's nor OpenAI's nor xAI's, using the cursor diversity lane default unless the routing table scores a better unseated family. - Add
fusion:deep-reasoneras a parallel track only when the user asks for it or the question hinges on Claude native long horizon reasoning. Its prompt must use thefusion-brief: v1isolated envelope.
Degrade when a track is unavailable:
- A panel never runs with fewer than two tracks. Two isolated instances of the same model still tend to outperform one in published multi-model deliberation results; the independent synthesis carries much of the lift.
- If a track fails to launch because its agent type does not exist (plugin not installed) or returns an unavailability line such as
grok unavailable: ...orcursor unavailable: ..., do not abort the panel. Rerun the missing track ascursor:cursor-rescueundercursor-role: diversityon a family distinct from the seated track and from the orchestrator, because a different family keeps the panel's independence that a same family Claude substitute cannot; only when Cursor is also unavailable, rerun it asfusion:deep-reasoner(plaindeep-reasonerif the namespaced form is not found) with the identical brief. Note every substitution in the final synthesis. - If no external engine is available, run a Claude only panel: two
fusion:deep-reasoner(plaindeep-reasonerif the namespaced form is not found) tracks with explicitly different lenses, and tell the user the panel ran without external engines. This is the only exception to the identical brief rule. Derive two direct prompts by addinglens: risk firstandlens: simplest viable answerto otherwise identicalfusion-brief: v1envelopes. - Availability failures are infrastructure, not verdicts; never present a missing engine as agreeing or disagreeing.
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.
- 5d ago Changed · +1 lines · +11 tokens per session 72f0d02bf4b4
- 1mo ago First seen · 57 lines · 23 tokens per session scan A bcd63da8ffeb
panel is a skill published in the GitHub repository okisdev/claude-code-fusion (3 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 34 tokens to every session and 1,464 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
review-team
A multi-reviewer code review process that checks a change from several specialist viewpoints and combines the results into one report. It can cover bugs, security, tests, dependencies, frontend behavior, and continuous-integration workflows.
conductor-orchestrator
Master coordinator for the Evaluate-Loop workflow v3. Supports GOAL-DRIVEN entry, PARALLEL execution via worker agents, BOARD OF DIRECTORS deliberation, and message bus coordination. Dispatches specialized workers dynamically, monitors via message bus, aggregates results. Uses metadata.json v3 for parallel state…
message-bus
File-based message queue for inter-agent coordination. Used by workers AND board directors to communicate. Provides: progress updates, task completion signals, file locking, board deliberation. Core infrastructure for parallel execution.
writing-skills
Use when creating new skills, editing existing skills, or verifying skills work before deployment.
parallel-dispatch
Parallel execution engine for dispatching worker agents. Used by conductor-orchestrator to spawn multiple workers simultaneously from DAG parallel groups. Handles dispatch, monitoring, aggregation, and failure recovery.
agent-factory
Creates specialized worker agents dynamically from templates. Use when orchestrator needs to spawn task-specific workers for parallel execution. Handles agent lifecycle: create -> execute -> cleanup.