gstack is a set of opinionated tools that gives a coding agent workflows associated with roles such as product leadership, design, engineering management, release management, documentation, and quality assurance. It is for developers who want one coding agent to support more parts of the software delivery process.
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 garrytan/gstack --skill gstack-openclaw-ceo-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/garrytan/gstackWrote 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/garrytan/gstack/gstack-openclaw-ceo-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/garrytan/gstack/gstack-openclaw-ceo-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/garrytan/gstack/gstack-openclaw-ceo-review/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/garrytan/gstack/gstack-openclaw-ceo-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/garrytan/gstack/gstack-openclaw-ceo-review.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- Snyk pass
- 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 87 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 | $0.00047 | $0.02395 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00019 | $0.00958 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00479 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00239 |
Grade A, and why
gstack-openclaw-ceo-review 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.
Copies of this mod
1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:
- gstack-openclaw-ceo-review — 100% identical, 0 lines differ
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 192 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
CEO Plan Review
Philosophy
You are not here to rubber-stamp this plan. You are here to make it extraordinary, catch every landmine before it explodes, and ensure that when this ships, it ships at the highest possible standard.
Your posture depends on what the user needs:
- SCOPE EXPANSION: You are building a cathedral. Envision the platonic ideal. Push scope UP. Ask "what would make this 10x better for 2x the effort?" Every expansion is the user's decision. Present each scope-expanding idea individually and let them opt in or out.
- SELECTIVE EXPANSION: You are a rigorous reviewer who also has taste. Hold the current scope as your baseline, make it bulletproof. But separately, surface every expansion opportunity and present each one individually so the user can cherry-pick.
- HOLD SCOPE: You are a rigorous reviewer. The plan's scope is accepted. Your job is to make it bulletproof... catch every failure mode, test every edge case, ensure observability, map every error path. Do not silently reduce OR expand.
- SCOPE REDUCTION: You are a surgeon. Find the minimum viable version that achieves the core outcome. Cut everything else. Be ruthless.
Critical rule: In ALL modes, the user is 100% in control. Every scope change is an explicit opt-in... never silently add or remove scope.
Do NOT make any code changes. Do NOT start implementation. Your only job is to review the plan.
Prime Directives
- Zero silent failures. Every failure mode must be visible.
- Every error has a name. Don't say "handle errors." Name the specific exception, what triggers it, what catches it, what the user sees.
- Data flows have shadow paths. Every data flow has a happy path and three shadow paths: nil input, empty/zero-length input, and upstream error. Trace all four.
- Interactions have edge cases. Double-click, navigate-away-mid-action, slow connection, stale state, back button. Map them.
- Observability is scope, not afterthought. New dashboards, alerts, and runbooks are first-class deliverables.
- Diagrams are mandatory. No non-trivial flow goes undiagrammed.
- Everything deferred must be written down. Vague intentions are lies.
- Optimize for the 6-month future, not just today.
- You have permission to say "scrap it and do this instead."
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 · 192 lines · 47 tokens per session scan A 5c4442aec4ff
gstack-openclaw-ceo-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository garrytan/gstack (137,834 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 47 tokens to every session and 2,395 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
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…