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 restarter/lets-workflow --skill goal-plan-cleangit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/restarter/lets-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/restarter/lets-workflow/goal-plan-clean)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/restarter/lets-workflow/goal-plan-clean"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/restarter/lets-workflow/goal-plan-clean/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/restarter/lets-workflow/goal-plan-clean"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/restarter/lets-workflow/goal-plan-clean.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 2 findings, up to high
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- high Tool Misuse · line 98 Tool parameters are crafted to achieve unintended or unsafe behavior. Parameter abuse can bypass intended safety checks (e.g. shell=True, --force, dangerous glob patterns).Fix: Validate all tool parameters against an allowlist. Reject dangerous parameter values (shell=True, --force, -rf /) and use safe defaults.
- high Memory Poisoning · line 144 Skill manipulates agent memory, state, or stored context. Memory corruption can alter personality, override safety rules, or cause unpredictable behavior.Fix: Protect agent memory and state from modification by untrusted content. Use read-only memory for critical instructions and validate all state changes.
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 | $0.00125 | $0.02094 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00050 | $0.00838 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00025 | $0.00419 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00209 |
Grade A, and why
goal-plan-clean scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 157 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
goal-plan-clean
Compose a /goal that drives the plan review-fix loop:
- Run
/lets:review --plan(or/lets:check --plan) - Read findings from
.lets/reviews/<latest> - Edit the plan file to address each BLOCKER and SUGGESTION
- Re-run review/check
- Repeat ≤3 iterations until verdict APPROVED
The skill never invokes /goal itself — Claude Code's /goal is a UI command (verified empirically: Skill(skill: "goal") returns "goal is a UI command, not a skill. Ask the user to run /goal themselves"). It composes well-structured text and presents for the user to paste.
IMPORTANT: If the spec below invokes any deferred tool (e.g.
AskUserQuestion), you MUST load and call it as specified. Never skip the call, never substitute a default answer of your own — the tool invocation is part of the contract. This is critical.
Step 1: Resolve plan file
LETS_PROJECT_ROOT=$(git rev-parse --show-toplevel)
BRANCH=$(git branch --show-current)
SLUG=${BRANCH#feature/}
PLAN_PATH="$LETS_PROJECT_ROOT/.lets/plans/${SLUG}.md"
test -f "$PLAN_PATH" && echo "found: $PLAN_PATH" || echo "NOT_FOUND"
If NOT_FOUND:
ls -1 "$LETS_PROJECT_ROOT/.lets/plans/"*.md 2>/dev/null
Then AskUserQuestion to pick from existing plans, or exit if none.
Validation (prevent path traversal): SLUG must match ^[a-zA-Z0-9._-]+$. If not, fail with "Invalid branch name for plan derivation."
Step 2: Resolve review tool
Parse args parameter:
args="review"or empty → use/lets:review --plan(deep, multi-agent, slower)args="check"→ use/lets:check --plan(inline 6-lens, faster, no agents)
If args is empty AND user context unclear, AskUserQuestion:
AskUserQuestion(
questions=[{
question: "Which tool for the iteration loop?",
header: "Tool",
options: [
{ label: "review (Recommended)", description: "/lets:review --plan — deep multi-agent review, slower, catches more" },
{ label: "check", description: "/lets:check --plan — inline 6-lens, faster, lighter" }
],
multiSelect: false
}]
)
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 · 157 lines · 125 tokens per session scan A 57e5759bc464
goal-plan-clean is a skill published in the GitHub repository restarter/lets-workflow (17 stars, last pushed 2d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 125 tokens to every session and 2,094 once invoked, about $0.0005 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
dekko-verify
Sanity-check a suspiciously low or zero call-graph result from dekko (getcallers, getcallees, findusages, impactedtests, unused) before concluding "no callers" or "dead code," or a heritage/throws-provenance result (query supertypes, query subtypes, query throws) that labels something (external) when you expect it to…
dekko-review-context
Give a code-review or PR-description flow a structural head start before reading a diff line by line. Trigger when the user asks for a PR description, a pre-merge summary, or invokes a code-review flow (/code-review, /review, or an equivalent) against a diff in a repo with a .dekko/ directory.
fix
Read this repo's open issues, triage them, and open one pull request per issue that can be fixed without a judgement call. Issues that need a decision, or that look stale or superseded, are reported with a recommendation rather than guessed at.
triage-report
Drain the .review/ report queue. Resolves un-triaged scan/audit reports (producer-agnostic — check-docs-consistency and any other scanner), dispatches the triage-report subagent (Sonnet) one report at a time for per-finding dispositions (promote / patch / dup / needs-investigation / dismiss), then the gateway absorbs…
watch-pr
Watch a GitHub pull request for CI status, reviews, comments, merge conflicts, and terminal states using the gh-watch extension. Use when the user wants to monitor a PR, wait for CI, or track PR progress.
review-health
Audit any repository's structural health and prompt surface, and file the findings as proposed epics and one-PR issues.