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 pjt222/agent-almanac --skill create-teamgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/pjt222/agent-almanacWrote 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/pjt222/agent-almanac/create-team)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/pjt222/agent-almanac/create-team"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/pjt222/agent-almanac/create-team/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/pjt222/agent-almanac/create-team"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/pjt222/agent-almanac/create-team.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00075 | $0.03597 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00030 | $0.01439 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00719 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00360 |
Grade A, and why
create-team 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 1mo 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 — 308 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Create a New Team
Define a multi-agent team composition that coordinates two or more agents to accomplish tasks requiring multiple perspectives, specialties, or phases. The resulting team file integrates with the teams registry and can be activated in Claude Code by name.
When to Use
- A task requires multiple perspectives that a single agent cannot provide (e.g., code review plus security audit plus architecture review)
- You need a recurring collaborative workflow with consistent role assignments and handoff patterns
- An existing agent composition is being used repeatedly and should be formalized
- A complex process naturally decomposes into phases or specialties handled by different agents
- You want to define a coordinated group for sprint-based, pipeline-based, or parallel work
Inputs
- Required: Team name (lowercase kebab-case, e.g.,
data-pipeline-review) - Required: Team purpose (one paragraph describing what problem requires multiple agents)
- Required: Lead agent (must exist in
agents/_registry.yml) - Optional: Coordination pattern (default: hub-and-spoke). One of:
hub-and-spoke,sequential,parallel,timeboxed,adaptive - Optional: Number of members (default: 3-4; recommended range: 2-5)
- Optional: Source material (existing workflow, runbook, or ad-hoc team composition to formalize)
Procedure
Step 1: Define Team Purpose
Articulate what problem requires multiple agents working together. A valid team purpose must answer:
- What outcome does this team deliver? (e.g., a comprehensive review report, a deployed application, a sprint increment)
- Why can't a single agent do this? Identify at least two distinct specialties or perspectives required.
- When should this team be activated? Define the trigger conditions.
Write the purpose as one paragraph that a human or agent can read to decide whether to activate this team.
Got: A clear paragraph explaining the team's value proposition, with at least two distinct specialties identified.
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 308 lines · 75 tokens per session scan A 6f0d581bca40
create-team is a skill published in the GitHub repository pjt222/agent-almanac (42 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 75 tokens to every session and 3,597 once invoked, about $0.0003 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.
Other skills, from other repositories
audit-pr
Audit a whole PR against the delivery contract and return MERGE-READY or evidenced blockers with the full URL. Consumes the current review-change REVIEW-PASS receipt instead of re-running review axes; posts a SHA-bound ready comment; never edits or merges. Triggers: "audit-pr", "is this PR ready", "merge gate".
execute-phase
Step executor for units whose triage (unit-lane) decided which steps the unit needs. Implements one triaged step (or all remaining steps), with frozen acceptance, step-local gates, commits, red-gate repair, and diff-size guard. BREAKING: replaced PLAN.md/TASKS.md/progress.md/ACCEPTANCE.md with the unit doc's Tasks…
fold-findings
Repair persisted fix-now findings in compatible atomic batches: root-cause fixes, green gate, commit/push, and per-row folded: yes updates. Never reclassify or substitute backlog notes. Triggers: "fold-findings", "fix the review findings", "repair audit blockers".
init-workspace
Adapt the workflow scaffold to a new repository or add only missing substrate blocks to an existing install. Every install, hook, and overwrite needs explicit consent. Triggers: "init-workspace", "set up agentic workflow", "upgrade workflow scaffold".
product-audit
Audit the whole product across code, quality, process, docs, roadmap, and tooling; it owns the repo-wide bug hunt, security research, and broken-version investigation (scoped and budgeted per dimension, as distinct from review-change's change-scoped review). Persist one severity-ranked, F-numbered report with…
review-change
Review a change with only applicable internal axes, classify every finding, persist fix-now work, and return one evidence-backed decision. Findings only; --adversarial N uses isolated reviewers; --synthesize fuses supplied reviewer tables. Triggers: "review-change", "review this change", "adversarial review".