Comet is a resumable workflow and skill platform for coding tasks, covering requirements work as well as skill creation, evaluation, and release. It supports separate Native and Classic workflows and can coordinate implementation and verification across isolated Git worktrees. The catalogue contains skills and instructions that implement Comet-related workflows.
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 rpamis/comet --skill writing-plansgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/rpamis/cometWrote 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/rpamis/comet/writing-plans)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/rpamis/comet/writing-plans"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/rpamis/comet/writing-plans.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00021 | $0.01607 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00804 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00004 | $0.00321 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00161 |
Grade A, and why
writing-plans 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 8d 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.
This is a copy
95% identical to writing-plans — 9 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 175 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Writing Plans
Overview
Write comprehensive implementation plans assuming the engineer has zero context for our codebase and questionable taste. Document everything they need to know: which files to touch for each task, code, testing, docs they might need to check, how to test it. Give them the whole plan as bite-sized tasks. DRY. YAGNI. TDD. Frequent commits.
Assume they are a skilled developer, but know almost nothing about our toolset or problem domain. Assume they don't know good test design very well.
Announce at start: "I'm using the writing-plans skill to create the implementation plan."
Context: If working in an isolated worktree, it should have been created via the superpowers:using-git-worktrees skill at execution time.
Save plans to: docs/superpowers/plans/YYYY-MM-DD-<feature-name>.md
- (User preferences for plan location override this default)
Scope Check
If the spec covers multiple independent subsystems, it should have been broken into sub-project specs during brainstorming. If it wasn't, suggest breaking this into separate plans — one per subsystem. Each plan should produce working, testable software on its own.
File Structure
Before defining tasks, map out which files will be created or modified and what each one is responsible for. This is where decomposition decisions get locked in.
- Design units with clear boundaries and well-defined interfaces. Each file should have one clear responsibility.
- You reason best about code you can hold in context at once, and your edits are more reliable when files are focused. Prefer smaller, focused files over large ones that do too much.
- Files that change together should live together. Split by responsibility, not by technical layer.
- In existing codebases, follow established patterns. If the codebase uses large files, don't unilaterally restructure - but if a file you're modifying has grown unwieldy, including a split in the plan is reasonable.
This structure informs the task decomposition. Each task should produce self-contained changes that make sense independently.
What ships with it
1 file beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 175 lines · 21 tokens per session scan A 272e1af349f5
writing-plans is a skill published in the GitHub repository rpamis/comet (2,937 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 21 tokens to every session and 1,607 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 95% identical to writing-plans, differing in 9 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
agent-spec-estimate
An effort-estimation method for agent-spec Task Contracts, which are structured descriptions of software work. It estimates work in rounds, meaning cycles of an AI agent doing and checking tasks.
agent-spec-intent-compiler
Use when converting PRD or issue prose into KLL requirements, running the intent compiler plan, or reverse-interviewing a human to resolve requirement ambiguity before task spec generation.
push-ci
Push to remote and monitor CI. Validates branch safety, executes git push WITH explicit user approval, then monitors CI run status via gh CLI. Use when: user says 'push', 'push and watch CI', 'ship it', 'push-ci'. Not for: committing (use /smart-commit), creating PRs (use /create-pr), merging (use /merge-prep).
create-request
Create, update, or scan per-task request tickets for progress tracking. These are date-prefixed non-lifecycle docs under requests/, NOT feature-level requirements (use /req-analyze for those). Use when: tracking task progress, updating completion status, scanning incomplete requests, checking request status dashboard.…
codex-setup
Initialize sd0x-dev-flow infrastructure for Codex CLI and other non-Claude agents. Generates AGENTS.md, installs the commit-msg hook, copies runner scripts. The pre-push gate is opt-in via --with-push-gate. Use when setting up a new project or after updating skills.
smart-rebase
Smart partial rebase for squash-merge repositories. Auto-detect which commits to keep/drop when base branch was squash-merged into target. Use when: user says 'rebase', 'partial rebase', 'base already merged', 'smart rebase', or /smart-rebase. Not for: simple git rebase (the developer runs it — Claude never executes…