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 sergezuber/FABULA-LLM-5 --skill subagentgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/sergezuber/FABULA-LLM-5Wrote 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/sergezuber/fabula-llm-5/subagent)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/sergezuber/fabula-llm-5/subagent"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/sergezuber/fabula-llm-5/subagent.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 | $0.00017 | $0.03530 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00009 | $0.01765 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00003 | $0.00706 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00002 | $0.00353 |
Grade A, and why
compose:subagent 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
86% identical to compose:subagent — 7 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 — 326 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Subagent-Driven Development
Execute plan by dispatching fresh subagent per task, with two-stage review after each: spec compliance review first, then code quality review.
Why subagents: You delegate tasks to specialized agents with isolated context. By precisely crafting their instructions and context, you ensure they stay focused and succeed at their task. They should never inherit your session's context or history — you construct exactly what they need. This also preserves your own context for coordination work.
Core principle: Fresh subagent per task + two-stage review (spec then quality) = high quality, fast iteration
Continuous execution: Do not pause to check in with your human partner between tasks. Execute all tasks from the plan without stopping. The only reasons to stop are: BLOCKED status you cannot resolve, ambiguity that genuinely prevents progress, or all tasks complete. "Should I continue?" prompts and progress summaries waste their time — they asked you to execute the plan, so execute it. When you must stop for ambiguity or a blocker, use compose:ask to present the situation with structured options. If no user is available, resolve it with your best judgment and continue.
When to Use
- Have implementation plan? — No → brainstorm first or manual execution
- Tasks mostly independent? — No (tightly coupled) → brainstorm first or manual execution
- Stay in this session? — Yes → compose:subagent / No → compose:execute (parallel session)
vs. Executing Plans (parallel session):
- Same session (no context switch)
- Fresh subagent per task (no context pollution)
- Two-stage review after each task: spec compliance first, then code quality
- Faster iteration (no human-in-loop between tasks)
The Process
Setup: Read plan → extract all tasks with full text → note context → create a task per plan task (task create)
Per Task:
- Dispatch implementer — create+bind task (
--task <TID>, auto-starts), inject covered spec as Intent, dispatch (./implementer-prompt.md) - Implementer asks questions? — Yes → answer, provide context, re-dispatch implementer
- Implementer implements — tests, commits, self-reviews
- Spec review phase 1 — dispatch with spec + diff only, no report
- Phase 1 flagged anything? — Yes → dispatch phase 2 (report explains flags, downgrade-only)
- Spec gate: all in-scope claims pass with evidence? — No → implementer fixes → back to spec review phase 1
- Code quality review — dispatch reviewer (
./code-quality-reviewer-prompt.md) - Quality approved? — No → implementer fixes → back to code quality review
- Mark task done —
task done <TID>
What ships with it
3 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.
- 8d ago First seen · 326 lines · 17 tokens per session scan A e0998da43c9a
compose:subagent is a skill published in the GitHub repository sergezuber/FABULA-LLM-5 (83 stars, last pushed 7d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 17 tokens to every session and 3,530 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 86% identical to compose:subagent, differing in 7 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
architecture-audit
Systematic architecture audit and refactoring methodology for Rust + TypeScript codebases. Use when performing refactoring, cleanup, unification, code review, dead code removal, module reorganization, or tech debt elimination. Ensures no naming confusion, semantic overloading, hidden defaults, duplicate logic, or…
e2e-testing
ORGII keeps two separate E2E surfaces. Do not use one as proof for the other.
dual-instance-verification
Dual-instance (双机) real-machine verification protocol for ORG2 cloud sync and session sharing. Use before declaring any sharing/sync/collab feature or fix "verified": share/unshare, push/retract, fork/import, comments, member-floor, replay, continuation, or anything touching Org2CloudSyncEngine, collab engines, or the…
org2-performance-guard
Prevent CPU, RAM, I/O, background-work, and false-green lifecycle regressions in ORG2. Use when adding or reviewing polling, timers, Realtime subscriptions, event listeners, workers, streaming paths, caches, pagination, provider-owned transcript ingestion or identity/dedupe, external-history scans, cloud sync…
react-best-practices
ORGII-specific React 19 performance review and implementation guidance, adapted from Vercel Engineering. Use for React performance, re-render, async waterfall, bundle, heavy dependency, virtualization, high-frequency event, Context/provider, or store-subscription work. Do not trigger for styling, copy changes, or…
create-orgii-agent
Create or modify a custom ORGII agent definition (and the org it belongs to). Use when the user wants to create, configure, retune, rename, or delete an agent, define an agent's soul / capabilities / tools, organise agents into an org, or asks about agent-definitions.json.