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 synaptiai/synapti-marketplace --skill team-coordinationgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/synaptiai/synapti-marketplaceWrote 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/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/team-coordination)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/team-coordination"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/team-coordination/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/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/team-coordination"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/synaptiai/synapti-marketplace/team-coordination.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" 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 | $0.00075 | $0.01104 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00030 | $0.00442 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00221 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00110 |
Grade A, and why
team-coordination 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 21d 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 — 57 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Team Coordination
Contract
Independent analysis before shared conclusions: teammates who see each other's findings are contaminated reviewers. Applies only when agentTeams: true and CLAUDE_CODE_EXPERIMENTAL_AGENT_TEAMS is set; commands/review.md Path A applies it, using the tables in references/paired-review-protocol.md verbatim. Returns consolidated P1/P2/P3 findings, each carrying a confidence and a disposition from the controlled set consensus|validated|refined|kept|unchallenged. The only permitted skip is the documented per-facet fallback to single-reviewer Path B; a paired-protocol failure never blocks a review.
When to Spawn Teams
| Scenario | Decision |
|---|---|
| Review with 3+ facets | Spawn: independent analysis enables the adversarial protocol |
| Large feature (>5 acceptance criteria, independent modules) | Suggest: parallel implementation across modules |
| Debugging with competing hypotheses | Spawn: one hypothesis per teammate |
| Small feature (<3 criteria) or sequential dependencies | Single session |
Task Sizing
5-6 tasks per teammate, each completable without coordination and carrying its own acceptance criteria. Overlapping file sets go to the same teammate.
Adversarial Review Protocol
Each facet runs as a paired reviewer: a skeptic ("assume the diff is broken until proven otherwise") and a verifier ("assume correct; look for missed edge cases and unenforced invariants"), dispatched in parallel with no view of each other. The default 6-facet topology is 12 invocations: 5 Agent(...) pairs plus 2 Skill(holdout-validation) lens calls.
- Independent analysis. Both variants return P1/P2/P3 findings with
file:linecitations. No challenge information in this phase. - Share. The lead indexes findings by facet. No LLM call. Holdout findings are indexed for consensus matching only.
- Challenge (disposition-only). Each variant labels the other's findings
AGREE,DISAGREE: <reason>, orREFINE: priority= category=WITHOUT re-reading the diff. Holdout-validation is excluded by design: it is objective claim-verification, soDISAGREEhas no meaning there. - Synthesize. The lead applies the consolidation table mechanically: both raised independently (same facet, file, lines ±2, priority ±1) → HIGH
consensus; AGREE → HIGHvalidated; REFINE → MEDIUMrefined; DISAGREE → LOWkept; timeout/error → MEDIUMunchallenged; both DISAGREE → dropped and journaled under## Dropped after challenge. A System One answer is not a challenger answer and never counts toward a drop. The lead never adjudicates. - Emit. Finding tables carry a trailing
_(confidence · disposition)_suffix; theFLOW_REVIEW_CYCLEmarker carries the 7-field rows perreferences/finding-ledger-parser.md.
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.
- 21d ago Changed af92004ade8c
- 1mo ago Changed · -162 lines · -5 tokens per session 4e453fcf0bda
- 1mo ago First seen · 219 lines · 80 tokens per session scan A b39b0384b1da
team-coordination is a skill published in the GitHub repository synaptiai/synapti-marketplace (7 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 75 tokens to every session and 1,104 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
check
Confirm a change before merge. /check verify drives the real app to prove behavior against the spec (every acceptance criterion met, every surface built). /check review runs a senior code review on a fresh model, one that did not write the code. Verify after /develop, review before a PR. Writes to docs/reviews/, never…
backlog
Seed a backlog from the project's documents: the Product Owner reads docs/ (plus the constitution and ROADMAP.md), proposes an ordered list of feature-sized items each traced to a source section, the user edits the list, and on explicit confirmation each item is filed as a GitHub issue that /story-time can import. Use…
architect
Produces Alon's design-doc system before code: SOURCEOFTRUTH.md, ARCHITECTUREROADMAP.md, TODOWORKFLOW.md, CLAUDE.md, plus a modular docs/architecture set for larger projects. Model first: data and invariants before framework, every invariant enforced at two boundaries, failure paths designed as deliberately as happy…
next-steps
Have the Product Owner survey the project's current state — shipped features, in-flight work, open findings, standing goals — and propose one concrete next feature ready to hand to /story-time or /spark. Use when the user has no idea in hand and asks "what should we build next", when a loop just closed and the next…
increment
Start the Act phase of the SPARK loop: build the increment strictly following the approved plan, task by task, with progress tracked in the plan. Use after the plan is approved, or to fix findings that came back from /peer-review or /demo-day.
x-spec
A system-planning guide that turns a vague idea into a set of linked design documents. It defines goals, modules, interfaces, data, workflows, and ways to check the result.