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 agentmods add skills/higoralves/orc/executing-plansnpx 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.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00051 | $0.00898 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00026 | $0.00449 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00010 | $0.00180 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $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 today.
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 — 85 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.
- today First seen · 85 lines · 51 tokens per session scan A c63f5764544d
executing-plans is a skill published in the GitHub repository HigorAlves/orc (6 stars, last pushed 7d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 51 tokens to every session and 898 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
taiyi-ui-design
TaiyiForge 第 4 阶段 — UI/UX 契约,产出 UI-DESIGN.md。四端通用。.
taiyi-evolve
TaiyiForge 辅助 — 实现后架构与文档同步(architecture-sync)。OpenCode / Claude / Codex / Cursor 通用。.
taiyi-diagram-c4
TaiyiForge 辅助 — 从代码反推 C4 架构文档(Observed/Inferred 分层 · Mermaid 真源)。OpenCode / Claude / Codex / Cursor 通用。.
writing-style
Use for technical communication - GitHub/GitLab tickets, PR/MR descriptions, issue comments, code review comments, commit messages. Direct, brief style with no AI-speak. NOT for README.md, public docs, or blog posts.
steer
Project-profile recalibration. Audits session calibration drift, presents per-cluster evidence for a user verdict, writes the updated project-profile rule, and inscribes a settled-direction clause.
re0-merge
Review and land an external contribution the way this suite does: gate it against the thesis, land it with the author's credit intact, complete a new skill rather than merging it raw, then approve, credit, and explain before closing. Use when reviewing a pull request, as any collaborator or maintainer, not only the…