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 serejaris/personal-corp-os --skill weekly-planninggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/serejaris/personal-corp-osWrote 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/serejaris/personal-corp-os/weekly-planning)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/serejaris/personal-corp-os/weekly-planning"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/serejaris/personal-corp-os/weekly-planning/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/serejaris/personal-corp-os/weekly-planning"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/serejaris/personal-corp-os/weekly-planning.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 6 findings, up to medium
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 →
- medium Excessive Agency · line 177 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
- medium Excessive Agency · line 178 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
- medium Excessive Agency · line 184 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
- medium Excessive Agency · line 197 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
- medium Excessive Agency · line 193 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
- low Excessive Agency · line 106 Skill's behavior or capabilities extend beyond its stated purpose. Scope creep allows an agent to perform actions unrelated to its documented functionality, increasing the attack surface.Fix: Limit the skill's scope to its documented purpose. Remove instructions that enable the agent to perform actions outside its stated functionality.
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 | $0.00049 | $0.02235 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00024 | $0.01118 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00447 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00224 |
Grade A, and why
weekly-planning 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 12d 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 — 268 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Weekly Planning
Overview
Turn retro findings + existing backlog into a prioritized week with clear outcomes, issues in correct repos, and delegation matrix (founder vs agent).
When to Use
- After weekly retro is complete
- Monday/Tuesday when planning the week
- When user says "план на неделю", "приоритизация", "что делаем"
Iron Rule: Planning Is Not Execution
Weekly planning creates a plan. It does not execute the plan.
Allowed during planning:
- Gather context needed to choose outcomes
- Read calendars, issues, project boards, CRM/backlog files, and recent notes
- Draft outcomes, issue proposals, and board updates
Not allowed during planning:
- Start implementation work for a chosen outcome
- Create deliverables, briefs, proposals, content, code, or production changes
- Spawn executor agents for work that belongs to the coming week
If the user asks to "do this now" while planning, finish or pause planning first, then handle that as a separate execution task.
Process
digraph planning {
rankdir=TB;
node [shape=box];
collect [label="1. Collect all tasks"];
calendar [label="2. Map calendar"];
group [label="3. Group by surface"];
eisenhower [label="4. Eisenhower split"];
outcomes [label="5. Choose outcomes"];
issues [label="6. Create issues\nin correct repos"];
board [label="7. Add to board\nwith W{NN} label"];
page [label="8. Create living\nweekly plan"];
collect -> calendar -> group -> eisenhower -> outcomes -> issues -> board -> page;
}
1. Collect all tasks
Sources to scan:
- Retro backlog (label
retro:W{NN-1}) - Open issues across ALL repos:
gh search issues --owner $YOUR_OWNER --state open - GitHub Projects for active initiatives
- Calendar events (meetings, lectures, mentoring)
- User input (new tasks from interview)
2. Map calendar
Read known sources before asking the user. Use calendar, existing issues, project boards, and planning files to establish:
- Today's date
- Planned week start/end
- Fixed events
- Known deadlines
- Available capacity
What ships with it
5 files 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.
- 12d ago First seen · 268 lines · 49 tokens per session scan A 6ce8600a5565
weekly-planning is a skill published in the GitHub repository serejaris/personal-corp-os (225 stars, last pushed 16d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 49 tokens to every session and 2,235 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
manuscript-review
Pre-publication manuscript audit producing a section-level refactoring report with citation hygiene and submission-readiness checks. Triggers on: "review my paper", "check before submission", "is this ready to submit", "pre-pub checklist", "refactor my paper", "check my references", "does the abstract work".
figure-rhetoric
Evaluate whether figures and plots in a manuscript effectively communicate the claims they support. Audits chart-type fit, axis design, visual hierarchy, data density, caption interpretation, perceptual accuracy, and narrative arc across 8 dimensions. Triggers on: "do my figures work", "check my plots", "are my graphs…
humanize
Detects and removes AI-generated writing patterns while preserving meaning and facts. Triggers on: "humanize text", "make this sound human", "remove AI patterns", "rewrite to sound natural", "make this less AI", "de-slop this", "not sound like ChatGPT", "human pass".
manuscript-provenance
Computational provenance audit verifying every number, table, and figure in a manuscript derives from code, not manual entry. Triggers on: "check provenance", "verify reproducibility", "audit my pipeline", "are my numbers from code", "provenance audit". Companion to manuscript-review (prose audit).
code-refiner
Deep code simplification and refactoring preserving behavior across Python, Go, TypeScript, Rust. Targets complexity, anti-patterns, readability debt. Triggers on: "simplify this code", "refactor for clarity", "reduce complexity", "make this more readable", "tech debt cleanup", "too much nesting".
competitive-analyzer
Competitive landscape analysis: Porter's Five Forces, competitor discovery, feature/pricing matrices, positioning maps, moat assessment via WebSearch. Triggers on: "competitive analysis", "competitor comparison", "competitive landscape", "Porter's Five Forces", "market positioning", "moat assessment", "defensibility…