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 agentmods add skills/orlando-japan/claude-code-setting/task-executionnpx skills add orlando-japan/claude-code-setting --skill task-executiongit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/orlando-japan/claude-code-settingWhat 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 | $0.00032 | $0.00788 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00016 | $0.00394 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00158 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00079 |
Grade A, and why
task-execution 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 2d 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 — 66 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Task execution
You have a task list. Your job is to execute it faithfully — not to expand it, not to improve it, not to second-guess the spec while implementing.
Protocol
- Read the next task fully before writing code. Understand the verification before the implementation.
- Verify understanding — if anything in the task is ambiguous, stop and ask before coding. Asking after implementation wastes work.
- Implement just that task. Not the next one, not related cleanup, not "while I'm here" improvements.
- Run the task's verification. It must pass for this task to be done.
- Mark the task done in
tasks.md— edit the file, don't just say it in chat. - Commit. One task group per commit, referencing the task IDs or spec slug.
- Next task.
Golden rules
Don't expand scope
If task 3 says "add a redirect for logged-out users hitting /settings," the task is that redirect. Not redirects for all protected routes. Not a refactor of the middleware. Not better error messages. Just the redirect.
Don't re-plan
The spec was approved. Re-litigating design decisions during implementation wastes time and destabilizes the work. If you spot a real problem with the design, stop and surface it — don't silently change course.
Don't silently fix the spec
If a task reveals the spec is wrong — a requirement that can't be met, a scenario that's self-contradictory, a design that breaks an existing feature — stop. Report the discrepancy. Let the user decide whether to update the spec or adjust the implementation. Don't patch it invisibly.
Don't batch verification
Run each task's verification immediately after implementing it. If you batch and verify at the end, you can't tell which change broke what.
Don't skip tasks
Tasks are ordered for a reason. Skipping ahead risks building on foundations that aren't in place yet. If a task is genuinely impossible to do now, surface it.
When to stop
- A task's verification fails and you can't diagnose it in ~30 min → stop, ask the user or the original spec author.
- A task reveals a spec contradiction → stop, surface, wait for decision.
- The task takes longer than estimated by >2x → stop, re-estimate, let the user decide whether to continue.
- You're about to touch a file the spec didn't anticipate → stop, ask.
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.
- 2d ago First seen · 66 lines · 32 tokens per session scan A b80e9a1d1559
task-execution is a skill published in the GitHub repository orlando-japan/claude-code-setting (2 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 32 tokens to every session and 788 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 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
create-task
Create and verify recurring or one-shot reminders, scripts, agent jobs, reports, and interactive skill launches.
Workflow Automation
Break a multi-step goal into execution stages, map those stages to Home23 tools and skills, and set safe execution order.
sop-mcp-usage
How to use the SOP-MCP server to execute, create, and improve Standard Operating Procedures.
vs-user-onboarding
Guide a brand-new SearchCLI/vs user from first-time usage questions to sign-up, purchase of Viking AI Search, AK/SK setup, and a working authenticated CLI. Use when the user says they downloaded or installed SearchCLI/vs and asks how to use it, how to start, sign up, buy, or onboard.
n8n-cli
Use the n8n CLI to manage workflows, credentials, executions, and more on an n8n instance. Use when the user asks to interact with n8n, automate workflows, manage credentials, or operate their instance from the command line.
zoom-meeting-scribe
Listen-only scribe workflow for Zoom meetings. Silently understand and record meeting transcripts delivered via RTMS, escalate only urgent matters to your supervisor, and post the report only after human approval once the meeting ends. Use when: receiving an inbox message with source=zoom (carrying a "[Zoom会議実況 チャンク#N…