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 TentacleOpera/switchboard --skill improve-plangit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/TentacleOpera/switchboardWrote 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/tentacleopera/switchboard/improve-plan)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/tentacleopera/switchboard/improve-plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tentacleopera/switchboard/improve-plan/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/tentacleopera/switchboard/improve-plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/tentacleopera/switchboard/improve-plan.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 1 finding, 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 45 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.
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 | $0.00000 | $0.05137 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.02055 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.01027 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00514 |
Grade A, and why
improve-plan 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 — 212 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Improve Plan
Use this workflow to strengthen an existing feature plan in a single fluid pass.
Critical Constraints
- NO IMPLEMENTATION: You are strictly FORBIDDEN from modifying any project source files. Your ONLY permissible write action is updating the existing Feature Plan document.
- CONTENT PRESERVATION (two-tier):
-
Factual context — NEVER delete. Goal statements, product scope, requirements, constraints, environment details, and problem/background analysis must be preserved verbatim. This includes product scope explicitly stated in the plan's Goal or Problem Description — you must not narrow or remove supported scenarios (e.g. multi-root workspaces) even if the current session is single-repo. If you believe a goal or scope statement is wrong, flag it in chat for the user — do not unilaterally correct it.
-
Reasoning outputs — correct with audit marking. Conclusions, chosen approaches, design decisions, and code examples may be corrected or replaced when the improve pass produces a better alternative. Every correction MUST be marked with a superseded callout so the change is auditable:
Superseded: Reason: Replaced with:
Never silently delete a conclusion and write a new one in its place. The callout is the audit trail — without it, the change is a protocol violation.
-
- SESSION vs PRODUCT SCOPE: Session directives (e.g. "single-repo", "skip compilation", "skip tests") constrain HOW you verify and organize the plan, not WHAT the plan covers. Do not conflate repo structure constraints with product feature requirements. If the plan targets multi-root workspaces, you must preserve and improve that scope regardless of the current session's repo configuration. Never transcribe a session directive into the plan file — not as a note, a caveat, or an explanation of what this run did or did not do. It binds you, not the reader. Written down it inverts: a later coder reads a constraint on the planner as an instruction to itself, and follows the document over the live dispatch that contradicts it.
- SINGLE PASS: Complete enhancement, dependency checks, the architecture challenge (Step 4), adversarial critique, balanced synthesis, the Goal-consistency pass (Step 6), and plan update in one continuous response.
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 Changed · +13 lines 88f5b97853ff
- 1mo ago Changed · +18 lines 4af07d52f961
- 1mo ago First seen · 181 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A 660fdd1af489
improve-plan is a skill published in the GitHub repository TentacleOpera/switchboard (215 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 5,137 tokens. 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
local-ai-agents
Build local-first AI agents that run entirely on a developer workstation with Microsoft Foundry Local and Qwen function-calling models. Covers Small Language Models (SLMs), the OpenAI-compatible local endpoint, sandboxed local tools, local RAG with Chroma, local MCP servers, hybrid cloud/local routing, and the…
systematic-debugging
Use when encountering any bug, test failure, or unexpected behavior, before proposing fixes.
next-cache-components-adoption
Turn on Cache Components in a Next.js app and resolve the blocking routes it surfaces. Use when the user wants to enable, adopt, or migrate to Cache Components, flip the cacheComponents flag, work through a flood of blocking-prerender / instant validation errors, run the cache-components-instant-false codemod, or…
chat-pet-sprite-creation
Use when creating or changing VS Code chat pet sprite art, sprite sheets, state animations, eye treatments, Stable/Insiders variants, or pet transitions under src/vs/workbench/contrib/chat/browser/widget/media/chatPet.
cpu-profile-analysis
Analyze V8/Chrome CPU profiles (.cpuprofile) and DevTools trace files (Trace-.json). Use when: profiling performance, investigating slow functions, comparing code paths, finding bottlenecks, analyzing timeToRequest, understanding call trees from sampling profiler data, analyzing layout/paint/rendering, investigating…
insight-error-page
Write or audit an insight-kind error page for the Next.js dev overlay. Use when creating a new errors/ .mdx page, auditing an existing one, or checking that a page matches the framework fix cards. Covers page structure, title alignment, FixCard cards with Copy prompt button, code snippets, terminology verification…