plan

plan is a skill for Claude Code, Codex from IAPro-Community/Orquestrador-Maestro. It costs 9 tokens per session (4,344 once invoked), scanned A, original, Apache-2.0.

A strategic planning method with an optional interview workflow.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to plan coding or project work and, when useful, interview the requester before forming the plan.
Why use it?
It helps turn an unclear request into a considered plan by gathering information when needed.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Written for no agent in particular: nothing here depends on one. Also seen: names the AskUserQuestion tool; mentions Codex.

Good fit Use it to plan coding or project work and, when useful, interview the requester before forming the plan.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/iapro-community/orquestrador-maestro/plan
Install

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.

Any agent
npx skills add IAPro-Community/Orquestrador-Maestro --skill plan
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/IAPro-Community/Orquestrador-Maestro

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for plan

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/iapro-community/orquestrador-maestro/plan/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/iapro-community/orquestrador-maestro/plan)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/iapro-community/orquestrador-maestro/plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/iapro-community/orquestrador-maestro/plan/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for plan

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/iapro-community/orquestrador-maestro/plan"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/iapro-community/orquestrador-maestro/plan.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 9 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 4,344 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe. Third-party audits
  • NVIDIA SkillSpector warn 7 Sept 2026
SkillSpector: 3 findings, 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 94
    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.
  • medium Excessive Agency · line 107
    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.
  • medium Excessive Agency · line 262
    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.
How audits are shown
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00009 $0.04344
Opus 5 $0.00005 $0.02172
Sonnet 5 $0.00002 $0.00869
Haiku 4.5 $0.00001 $0.00434

Measured 10d ago against content hash 3297a7fe7db4, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-10, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

plan 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 10d 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.

Origin

Copies of this mod

1 near-identical copy found in the catalogue:

  • plan — 88% identical, 28 lines differ
codex/skills/plan/SKILL.md · 280 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 280 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

<Use_When>

  • User wants to plan before implementing -- "plan this", "plan the", "let's plan"
  • User wants structured requirements gathering for a vague idea
  • User wants an existing plan reviewed -- "review this plan", --review
  • User wants multi-perspective consensus on a plan -- --consensus, "ralplan"
  • Task is broad or vague and needs scoping before any code is written </Use_When>

<Do_Not_Use_When>

  • User wants autonomous end-to-end execution -- use autopilot instead
  • User wants to start coding immediately with a clear task -- use ralph or delegate to executor
  • User asks a simple question that can be answered directly -- just answer it
  • Task is a single focused fix with obvious scope -- skip planning, just do it </Do_Not_Use_When>

<Why_This_Exists> Jumping into code without understanding requirements leads to rework, scope creep, and missed edge cases. Plan provides structured requirements gathering, expert analysis, and quality-gated plans so that execution starts from a solid foundation. The consensus mode adds multi-perspective validation for high-stakes projects. </Why_This_Exists>

<Execution_Policy>

  • Auto-detect interview vs direct mode based on request specificity
  • Ask one question at a time during interviews -- never batch multiple questions
  • Gather codebase facts via explore agent before asking the user about them
  • When session guidance enables USE_OMX_EXPLORE_CMD, prefer omx explore for simple read-only repository lookups during planning; keep prompts narrow and concrete, and keep prompt-heavy or ambiguous planning work on the richer normal path and fall back normally if omx explore is unavailable.
  • Plans must meet quality standards: 80%+ claims cite file/line, 90%+ criteria are testable
  • Implementation step count must be right-sized to task scope; avoid defaulting to exactly five steps when the work is clearly smaller or larger
  • Consensus mode outputs the final plan by default; add --interactive to enable execution handoff
  • Consensus mode uses RALPLAN-DR short mode by default; switch to deliberate mode with --deliberate or when the request explicitly signals high risk (auth/security, data migration, destructive/irreversible changes, production incident, compliance/PII, public API breakage)
  • Default to concise, evidence-dense progress and completion reporting unless the user or risk level requires more detail
  • Treat newer user task updates as local overrides for the active workflow branch while preserving earlier non-conflicting constraints
  • If correctness depends on additional inspection, retrieval, execution, or verification, keep using the relevant tools until the plan is grounded
  • Continue through clear, low-risk, reversible next steps automatically; ask only when the next step is materially branching, destructive, or preference-dependent </Execution_Policy>

Mode Selection

Mode Trigger Behavior
Interview Default for broad requests Interactive requirements gathering
Direct --direct, or detailed request Skip interview, generate plan directly
Consensus --consensus, "ralplan" Planner -> Architect -> Critic loop until agreement with RALPLAN-DR structured deliberation (short by default, --deliberate for high-risk); outputs plan by default
Consensus Interactive --consensus --interactive Same as Consensus but pauses for user feedback at draft and approval steps, then hands off to execution
Review --review, "review this plan" Critic evaluation of existing plan

Read the full file on GitHub · 280 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 10d ago First seen · 280 lines · 9 tokens per session scan A 3297a7fe7db4

Subscribe to this mod's changes

plan is a skill published in the GitHub repository IAPro-Community/Orquestrador-Maestro (41 stars, last pushed today), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 9 tokens to every session and 4,344 once invoked, about $0.0000 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 2026-08-30.