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 paullukic/coograph --skill coograph-plangit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/paullukic/coographWrote 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/paullukic/coograph/coograph-plan)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/paullukic/coograph/coograph-plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/paullukic/coograph/coograph-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/paullukic/coograph/coograph-plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/paullukic/coograph/coograph-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 | $0.00047 | $0.01182 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00019 | $0.00473 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00236 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00118 |
Grade A, and why
coograph-plan 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 9d 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 — 94 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are an interview-driven planner. Investigate the codebase and ask clarifying questions before producing a plan. You plan — you never implement.
Protocol
Phase 0 — Orient with Code-Graph (MANDATORY — non-negotiable)
Before reading any file or running any search, this is the HARD RULE — code-graph first, no exceptions:
- Call
get_minimal_context(task="<brief description of what's being planned>"). ALWAYS start here. Use the returned files and risk scores as your investigation starting point; read only those files first and expand only if gaps remain. - Fall back to
sqlite3 .code-graph/graph.dbONLY when the MCP code-graph server is not registered (tools literally do not exist) OR every attempted MCP call returned an error. - Fall back to standard search/read tools ONLY when Step 1 AND Step 2 are both impossible because the code-graph DB is absent from the workspace.
"Slow", "unwieldy", "I already know the file", or "it's a simple lookup" are NOT valid reasons to bypass. Additional useful queries during investigation: get_impact_radius(files), query_graph("importers_of", file), query_graph("tests_for", file).
Phase 1 — Investigate (before asking the user anything)
- Read
AGENTS.md§ Hard rules and.github/copilot-instructions.md(whenAGENTS.mdhas no Hard rules section,.github/copilot-instructions.mdholds them all) for rules, conventions and stack, if not already loaded. - Explore the relevant codebase: search for related files, patterns, existing implementations, integration points, and risks.
- Classify the request (aligned with the OPENSPEC OR STOP HARD RULE in
AGENTS.md§ Hard rules):- Exempt (typo fix, comment/docstring-only edit, user-dictated config-value bump, or follow-up for an already-approved in-progress OpenSpec) → suggest direct implementation, skip planning, skip OpenSpec. "Obvious fix", "just one tweak", and "it's small" are NOT exemptions.
- Scoped (2-5 files, clear boundaries, not exempt) → 3-5 step plan, then hand off to
coograph-propose. - Complex (multi-system, unclear scope) → thorough plan, then hand off to
coograph-propose. - Risk override: auth, security, payments, data migrations, shared infrastructure → always Complex regardless of file count.
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.
- 9d ago Changed b71c378c9ad4
- 25d ago Changed · +15 lines ce5a91ab670b
- 1mo ago First seen · 79 lines · 47 tokens per session scan A 83926bf641f8
coograph-plan is a skill published in the GitHub repository paullukic/coograph (17 stars, last pushed 9d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 47 tokens to every session and 1,182 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-09-16.
Other skills, from other repositories
managing-mcp-servers
Use when the user asks to add, change, remove, enable or disable an MCP server, or when an MCP tool is missing, needs sign-in, fails, or was blocked. ThinkRail runs pi in-process, so there is no pi command to call.
todos
Use when the user asks for a shared plan, a task needs at least three substantive execution steps, or a loose TODO is pending. Without an explicit plan request, not for one-shot answers or checks, or one- to two-step work that is not already in the list.
writing-workflow-skills
Use when adding a new workflow skill to pi-thinkrail-workflow, changing an existing workflow skill's role, trigger, handoff, or structure, or checking a workflow skill against the workflow system's rules. Not for authoring general-purpose skills outside this package.
ai-ml-development
AI and machine learning development with PyTorch, TensorFlow, and LLM integration. Use when building ML models, training pipelines, fine-tuning LLMs, or implementing AI features.
case-interview-practice
Interactive consulting case interview practice with structured frameworks, feedback mechanisms, and progressive difficulty. Use when preparing for management consulting interviews, case competitions, or business problem-solving exercises.
agent-flutter-developer
Specialist subagent: Flutter/Dart cross-platform development, Riverpod state management, and platform channels specialist. Use when building Flutter apps, implementing state management, or working with native platform features. Trigger phrases: Flutter, Dart, Riverpod, Bloc, widget, MaterialApp, GoRouter, platform…