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 HigorAlves/orc --skill executing-plansgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/HigorAlves/orcWrote 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/higoralves/orc/executing-plans)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/higoralves/orc/executing-plans"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/higoralves/orc/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/higoralves/orc/executing-plans"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/higoralves/orc/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 | $0.00032 | $0.00902 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00361 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00180 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00090 |
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 7d 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.
This is a copy
86% identical to executing-plans — 50 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 86 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Executing Plans
Overview
Load plan, review critically, execute all tasks, report when complete.
Announce at start: "I'm using the executing-plans skill to implement this plan."
Note: Tell your human partner that Superpowers works much better with access to subagents. The quality of its work will be significantly higher if run on a platform with subagent support (such as Claude Code or Codex). If subagents are available, use superpowers:subagent-driven-development instead of this skill.
The Process
Step 1: Load and Review Plan
- Read plan file
- Review critically - identify any questions or concerns about the plan
- If concerns: Raise them with your human partner before starting
- If no concerns: Create TodoWrite and proceed
Step 2: Execute Tasks
For each task:
- Mark as in_progress
- Follow each step exactly (plan has bite-sized steps)
- Run verifications as specified
- Mark as completed
Step 3: Complete Development
After all tasks complete and verified:
- Announce: "I'm using the finishing-a-development-branch skill to complete this work."
- REQUIRED SUB-SKILL: Use superpowers:finishing-a-development-branch
- Follow that skill to verify tests, present options, execute choice
When to Stop and Ask for Help
STOP executing immediately when:
- Hit a blocker (missing dependency, test fails, instruction unclear)
- Plan has critical gaps preventing starting
- You don't understand an instruction
- Verification fails repeatedly
Ask for clarification rather than guessing.
When to Revisit Earlier Steps
Return to Review (Step 1) when:
- Partner updates the plan based on your feedback
- Fundamental approach needs rethinking
Don't force through blockers - stop and ask.
Workspace mode
When the plan was authored in workspace mode (caller is /orc:flow or /orc:plan with --repos), each slice carries a repo: annotation. Execution rules:
- Before each slice,
cdinto the slice'srepoPath(passed by the caller as input). All git, test, lint, and edit commands MUST run inside that repo's tree. - Sibling repos are off-limits. A slice tagged
repo: apimay not edit files in<workspaceRoot>/ui/. The worktree-path boundary already enforces this physically; treat any urge to cross it as a bug in the plan, not in your execution — escalate. - The plan's Cross-repo contract section (when present) is frozen for the duration of execution. If a slice would change an endpoint shape, schema, or message format listed there, stop and surface — that's a plan change, not an implementation choice.
- Restore-before-act extends to per-repo state. On resume, read both
<workspaceRoot>/.orc/<branch>/files/checkpoint.md(workspace-level cursor) and<repoPath>/.orc/<branch>/files/progress.md(this repo's slice log) before executing the next slice. - When dispatched in parallel for a workspace plan (one implementer per repo), treat your
repo+repoPathas your full universe — sibling implementers are operating in their own repos simultaneously.
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.
- 7d ago Changed · +1 lines · -19 tokens per session f194e3ee0d5e
- 1mo ago First seen · 85 lines · 51 tokens per session scan A c63f5764544d
executing-plans is a skill published in the GitHub repository HigorAlves/orc (7 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 32 tokens to every session and 902 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 86% identical to executing-plans, differing in 50 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
engineering-discipline
Behavioral guidelines to reduce common agent coding mistakes — thinking before coding, simplicity, surgical changes, goal-driven execution, and mandatory verification for data/BI work. Adapted from andrej-karpathy-skills (MIT), with a data/BI engineering layer added. Use this skill whenever writing, editing, or…
open-problem
Use when the user points at a hard, unsolved, or open problem in any field — mathematics, physics, biology, ML, engineering — and wants a real attack on it. Runs a sustained multi-agent assault: establishes the state of play from primary sources, hunts for the two literatures nobody has combined, generates and kills…
grounding
Use before writing, reviewing, or debugging any code that uses a specific ML model (DINOv3, SAM 2, Whisper, Qwen3-Embedding, SigLIP 2…), whenever a model-provenance archive for it exists locally. Loads that archive's real source — checkpoint ids, API signatures, preprocessing constants, training recipe — so the code…
horizon
Run a durable Horizon workflow for a multi-feature goal with bounded autonomous retries and an audit trail.
check-in
Record a Parallax protocol checkpoint with concrete evidence before gated implementation work.
debug
Perform an evidence-based Parallax diagnosis or post-build audit and verify the repair.