Universal build toolkit

Package Builder
the factory behind every FACTA product

7 instantiable template stacks, a native roster of specialized agents across roughly 28 divisions, and NEXUS orchestration end to end — package-builder is the Claude Code workspace FACTA scaffolds its own products with, not a runtime you deploy to end users (that's talos). MIT-licensed, distributed as a workspace plus a `pb:` plugin that also reaches Cursor, Copilot, and other tools.

// rename.sh substitutes the placeholders. verify-template.sh proves it builds.

MIT-licensed, not a subscription

No license fee, no SaaS, no lock-in. The workspace is yours — self-hosted, distributed as a Claude Code workspace plus the `pb:` plugin, with the same roster reachable from other tools.

  • MIT licensed
  • Claude Code workspace
  • 7 template stacks
  • ~331 agents / ~28 divisions
  • pb: command namespace
  • NEXUS orchestration

The blank-repo problem

Every new stack doesn't start from your idea. It starts from a blank repo.

Seven different stacks — a frontend, a Python backend, a Rust backend, a mobile app, a CLI, a browser extension, a presentation builder — each need their own auth pattern, their own CI, their own placeholder-free skeleton. Rebuilt from scratch, that's the same plumbing paid for again on every product, and the specialized expertise behind it — an engineering review, a security pass, a finance model — never travels with it. Without a standing integrity gate, one product's skeleton drifts from the next, and nobody can prove two builds were done the same way.

You don't have a boilerplate problem. You have a factory problem — no shared skeleton, no shared roster, no shared gate.

The workflow

Three steps. One factory.

Instantiate a template, verify it builds clean, then hand it to the native agent roster. Every stack runs through the same integrity gate before it ships.

Currently 7 template stacks, ~331 agents across ~28 divisions, ~89 skills. Claude Code is the native workspace; the `pb:` namespace also reaches other tools.

The divisions — currently ~28, ~331 agents in total

Eight divisions here, out of the ~28 in the roster

Each division ships as a set of specialized agents and skills, ready to instantiate on any of the 7 template stacks. Pick the one in front of you — the rest of the roster is already in the workspace when you need it.

Who it's for

A factory for whoever builds the next product

Package Builder isn't a product you deploy to end users — it's the workspace FACTA (and any Claude Code team) uses to scaffold new products fast, with governance built in from the first commit.

Why different

Blank repos, copy-pasted scripts,
or a factory you can verify.

Three ways teams scaffold a new stack — and where each one runs out of road.

Blank repoCopy-pasted scriptsPackage Builder
Template coveragenopartialyes
Verified builds (CI-gated)nopartialyes
Multi-tool distribution (pb:)nonoyes
pb: namespace (no collision)nonoyes
Multi-tenancy + RBACnonoyes
Provenance leak-guardnonoyes
License modelRebuilt every timeCopied every timeMIT — open

Enterprise

Multi-tenant by design — and the rates stay yours to set.

Multi-tenancy, RBAC on every destructive action, and a fail-closed provenance gate — for the security team that needs to read the record before anything ships. Token budgets and rates are operator-owned, not shipped. No SaaS lock-in.

By the numbers

Architecture-scale counts, not revenue.

Architecture-scale counts, not revenue — package-builder is pre-external-revenue by design. Counts are dynamic; verify current numbers in conversation.

Talk to the founders

Package Builder isn't a product you buy —
it's the factory FACTA builds with.

If you're scaffolding a new stack from a blank repo, you're paying for the same plumbing FACTA already solved. package-builder is MIT-licensed and open — talk to the founders to see the template stacks and the roster in a real workspace.

Open, not priced

Open source. MIT-licensed. Distributed as a Claude Code workspace.

No tiers, no license fee. 7 template stacks, the full agent roster, and the `pb:` command namespace — self-hosted in your own workspace, and reachable from other tools through the same namespace.

MIT-licensed because the factory should be frictionless to adopt. There's no server to charge for and no seat fee to set — any cost you run (tokens, compute) is yours to govern, at rates you set per tenant.

MIT licensed · Claude Code workspace · Multi-tool via pb: · No SaaS, no lock-in · Operator-owned cost governance

Open source

Package Builder

7 template stacks + ~331 agents + pb: commands

open license · self-hosted

Full roster included

What's included:

  • 7 instantiable template stacks — frontend-react, backend-python, backend-rust, mobile-rn, cli, chrome-extension, html-ppt-template
  • ~331 specialized agents across ~28 divisions, ~89 skills — counts verified at read time
  • pb: command namespace — works across Claude Code, Cursor, Copilot, and other tools
  • NEXUS 7-phase orchestration via `/nexus [mode]`
  • Multi-tenancy with RBAC on every destructive action
  • Offline-guarded integrations behind a fail-closed provenance gate
  • Per-tenant token budgets — rates are operator-owned, not shipped
  • MIT licensed, no SaaS, no lock-in
Talk to the founders

Why MIT, and why now

Every new stack used to mean rebuilding the same plumbing. Now it means running `rename.sh` against a verified skeleton.

FACTA open-sourced the factory it builds its own products with, MIT-licensed, because a verified skeleton and a governed agent roster shouldn't be reinvented per team. Fork it, run it in your own workspace, and set your own token budgets — the cost you pay is the compute you run, not a license fee to FACTA.

MIT licensed. No server to run, no SaaS to leave, no seat fee to negotiate.

How teams adopt the factory

From one template to a multi-tenant factory

Four stages — Evaluate, Adopt, Expand, Sovereign. There's no purchase gate — it's MIT-licensed from the first clone.

package-builder itself is pre-external-revenue — this describes how a team inside or alongside FACTA actually adopts it, not a sales funnel.

What changes when the factory is open

What actually changes

No invented dollar figures — the savings are in the plumbing you stop rebuilding and the governance you stop bolting on after the fact.

License model

Without

Rebuilt from scratch, every stack, every team

With Package Builder

MIT-licensed, forked once, extended forever

Saving

Stop the bleed

Tool coverage

Without

One stack, hand-rolled auth and CI

With Package Builder

7 verified stacks, one pb: namespace across tools

Saving

6 stacks you didn't hand-roll

Audit depth

Without

Ad hoc, no record

With Package Builder

Integrity gate + provenance leak-guard on every template

Saving

Audit-ready

Updates

Without

Rewritten by hand, or never

With Package Builder

Fork and pull — no seat fee, ever

Saving

Lifetime

Ownership

Without

Rented from a vendor

With Package Builder

Self-hosted workspace, MIT-licensed, owned by you

Saving

Yours

Counts are architecture-scale, not revenue — package-builder has no external customers yet. Verify current counts in conversation.

Security you can put in front of legal.

No cloud to breach — the workspace lives in your own repo. RBAC gates every destructive action, verified against your identity provider. Data integrations are offline-guarded and resolve credentials through a fail-closed provenance gate. MIT-licensed, no SaaS, no lock-in.

Talk to the founders

No lock-in, no surprises

  • MIT licensed, no recurring fee
  • 7 template stacks, ready to instantiate
  • ~331 agents across ~28 divisions
  • ~89 reusable skills
  • pb: command namespace
  • NEXUS 7-phase orchestration
  • No SaaS, no lock-in
  • Self-hosted workspace

FAQ

Frequently asked questions

Everything you need to know about the toolkit — message us on WhatsApp if anything's still unclear.

Is this a SaaS subscription?+

No. package-builder is MIT-licensed and self-hosted — there's no subscription, no seat fee, and no server we operate for you.

Which tools does it support?+

Claude Code is the native workspace. The `pb:` command namespace also distributes to Cursor, GitHub Copilot, and other tools without colliding with a host project's own commands.

What's the pb: namespace?+

A plugin manifest feature that exposes the whole roster — agents, skills, and commands — under /pb:xxxx, so it never collides with a host project's own commands.

How many agents and divisions do I get?+

The full roster — currently ~331 specialized agents across ~28 divisions and ~89 skills. Counts are dynamic and derived from the filesystem, not a fixed number we guarantee.

How do updates work?+

Fork or pull the workspace whenever you want — there's no license to renew and no update fee, because there's no license fee to begin with.

Is there a trial?+

There's no trial because there's no purchase — it's MIT-licensed. Talk to the founders if you want a walkthrough before you adopt it.

Can I see the templates before I adopt one?+

Yes — talk to the founders and we'll walk through a template stack and the integrity gate that verifies it.

How do I actually get it?+

Talk to the founders on WhatsApp — there's no purchase flow and no license to sign; we'll help you get the workspace running in your own repo.

Own the workspace

Want to see it running first?
Talk to the founders.

We'll walk you through the template stacks, the agent roster, and the integrity gate that verifies every one of them. package-builder is MIT-licensed and self-hosted: no purchase, no license to sign, no follow-up pressure.

  • MIT licensed
  • 7 template stacks
  • ~331 agents / ~28 divisions
  • No SaaS

Your Privacy Matters

We use cookies to enhance your experience, analyze traffic, and serve targeted ads.

By clicking "Accept All", you consent to all cookies. Cookie Policy