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 BlueprintOS/analysis-to-delivery --skill executing-plansgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/BlueprintOS/analysis-to-deliveryWrote 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/blueprintos/analysis-to-delivery/executing-plans)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/blueprintos/analysis-to-delivery/executing-plans"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/blueprintos/analysis-to-delivery/executing-plans/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/blueprintos/analysis-to-delivery/executing-plans"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/blueprintos/analysis-to-delivery/executing-plans.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 | $0.00046 | $0.00788 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00315 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00158 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00079 |
Grade A, and why
executing-plans 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.
What it actually says
Executing-Plans(桥接到 superpowers)
Contract
- Inputs: writing plan, passing task tests, implementation diff
- Outputs: commit history and 5-question retrospective / knowledge updates
- Gates: tests pass; verification command recorded; commit or explicit handoff state exists
- Required disciplines:
stage-gate - Next: next
/tddtask or/verification-before-completion
本仓库不维护此 skill 的内容。完整纪律请读:
<SUPERPOWERS_SKILL_ROOT>/executing-plans/SKILL.md
何时调
- tdd 通过后,逐步 commit
- 每个 writing-plans 子任务 GREEN 后
衔接点
- 产出:commit history + 5 问复盘(沉淀到知识库)
- 下一步:下一任务(回到
/tdd)或/verification-before-completion - 门控:
disciplines/stage-gate第 3 层(commit + 复盘 + 沉淀三件套)
降级方案(superpowers 未装时)
如果 <SUPERPOWERS_SKILL_ROOT>/executing-plans/ 不存在,按以下 4 步执行 + 复盘:
1. 一次一个任务
- 从 plan 第 1 个未被 blocked 的任务开始
- 走
/tdd红绿循环直到 GREEN - ❌ 跳任务 = 中间某个依赖没建,后面全崩
2. commit 前 3 件套
| 件 | 内容 | 标志 |
|---|---|---|
| Verify | 跑完整验证命令看到 0 失败 | "VERIFIED:" 在 commit msg |
| Test | RED→GREEN 转换记录在 commit msg | 让人能复现 |
| 复盘 | 5 问复盘填到 commit body 或 PR | 沉淀到知识库 |
3. 5 问复盘模板
每次 commit 后回答 5 问:
- 实际用时 vs 估计:偏差多少?为什么?
- 遇到什么意外:踩了什么坑?
- 有什么可以做得更好:下次的规则/工具变更?
- 学到什么新知识:要写入知识库哪一篇?
- 下一步动作:接哪个任务 / 是否需要回头改 plan?
4. 进入下一个任务或停
- 下一个任务 → 回到
/tdd - 全部完成 → 走
/verification-before-completion - 卡住 → 停下,把 5 问复盘写到
RETRO_<topic>.md,向用户汇报
最小纪律摘要
- 不跳任务:plan 顺序有依赖,跳 = 后面崩
- commit 前必 verify:
verification-before-completion5 步铁律 - 5 问不复盘 = 知识不沉淀:下次再踩同一个坑
- 卡住就停,不要硬刚:停 > 撞墙
安装提示
npx skills@latest add obra/superpowers-executing-plans
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 First seen · 78 lines · 46 tokens per session scan A 7ac379c85f17
executing-plans is a skill published in the GitHub repository BlueprintOS/analysis-to-delivery (26 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 46 tokens to every session and 788 once invoked, about $0.0002 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
analytics-strategy
Design measurement frameworks including event taxonomy, KPI hierarchy, dashboard architecture, attribution models, and analytics implementation strategy. Use this skill whenever the user wants to plan analytics, design dashboards, build event taxonomies, define KPIs, set up tracking, or audit existing measurement.…
content-strategy
Develop a content strategy covering editorial positioning, content pillars, formats, calendar, governance, and topical authority planning. Use this skill whenever the user wants to plan a content program, define content pillars, build an editorial calendar, structure topic clusters, set up content governance, or align…
incident-response
Manage active production incidents through detection, triage, mitigation, communication, and resolution with structured roles and decision-making. Use this skill whenever the user has an active incident, a production issue, a service outage, a security incident, or needs to plan incident response procedures. Triggers…
stakeholder-communication
Communicate effectively with stakeholders across functions and seniority levels. Use this skill when writing status updates, preparing executive reviews, sharing technical decisions with non-technical audiences, managing up, communicating bad news, or designing the communication cadence for a project. Triggers on…
review-work
Post-implementation gate review: run manual QA on the real surface yourself, then launch ONE gate reviewer (never a panel) to audit goal, constraints, code quality, security, missed context, and QA evidence. Use before a PR handoff or when the user explicitly asks to review completed work.
agb-begriff-vorformuliert-305
Für AGB Begriff Vorformuliert 305: ordnet Norm, Beweislast und Gegenargument; Ergebnis: Prüfprodukt mit Risiko und nächstem Schritt. Fachgebiet: AGB-Recht-Prüfer. Route: agb-begriff-vorformuliert-305.