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 KaimingWan/oh-my-kiro --skill omk-planninggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/KaimingWan/oh-my-kiroWrote 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/kaimingwan/oh-my-kiro/omk-planning)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/kaimingwan/oh-my-kiro/omk-planning"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/kaimingwan/oh-my-kiro/omk-planning/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/kaimingwan/oh-my-kiro/omk-planning"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/kaimingwan/oh-my-kiro/omk-planning.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 | $0.00076 | $0.06016 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00038 | $0.03008 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00015 | $0.01203 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00602 |
Grade A, and why
omk-planning 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 11d 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 469 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Trigger Examples
- "@plan 重构 hook 系统"
- "I want to add OAuth support, help me plan it"
- "设计一个新的 knowledge 同步方案"
- "@execute 继续执行计划"
- "break this feature into tasks"
Planning — Write, Review, Execute
Overview
One skill for the full plan lifecycle: write → review → execute.
Phase 0: Deep Understanding
Before writing any plan, build deep understanding of the goal. Skip this phase only if the user provides a fully specified design doc.
Step 1: Form Initial Understanding
Start with generate_codebase_overview to get the project's high-level structure, then read relevant code, docs, and recent commits to understand the context. Do NOT ask questions yet — first build your own mental model of:
- What the user wants to achieve
- What exists today (current state)
- What would need to change (gap analysis)
Step 2: Ask Clarifying Questions
Based on your understanding, ask questions one at a time. Each question must:
- Eliminate a whole branch of ambiguity (not trivial details)
- Build on previous answers (incremental deepening)
- Offer multiple-choice options with your recommendation when possible
Dynamic termination: Stop asking when remaining uncertainty won't materially affect the plan. Don't ask for the sake of asking.
Soft cap: Maximum 5 questions. If you still have uncertainty after 5, state your assumptions and proceed.
Step 3: Research (optional)
After questions are answered, judge whether research is needed:
- Codebase research: When the task touches existing code you haven't fully explored (e.g., modifying a hook system — read existing hooks first)
- Web research: When the task involves external tools, APIs, or best practices you're unsure about (e.g., integrating a new library, adopting an unfamiliar pattern)
- Both: When the task combines internal changes with external dependencies (e.g., adding OAuth to an existing auth module)
- Skip: When you have sufficient understanding (e.g., renaming a variable, fixing a typo, simple refactors with clear scope)
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.
- 11d ago First seen · 469 lines · 76 tokens per session scan A d449fa06716e
omk-planning is a skill published in the GitHub repository KaimingWan/oh-my-kiro (103 stars, last pushed 5mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 76 tokens to every session and 6,016 once invoked, about $0.0004 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.
Other skills, from other repositories
engram-testing-coverage
TDD and coverage standards for Engram. Trigger: When implementing behavior changes in any package.
iterative-development
TDD iteration loops using Claude Code Stop hooks - runs tests after each response, feeds failures back automatically.
python
Python development with ruff, mypy, pytest - TDD and type safety.
nw-fp-clojure
Clojure language-specific patterns, data-first modeling, REPL-driven development, and spec.
strict-tdd
Strict RED->GREEN->REFACTOR test-driven development with enforcement. Never write production code before a failing test. Atomic commits per TDD cycle.
mobiai-mobile-tdd
You MUST use this before writing any implementation code for a mobile feature, bug fix, refactor, or behavior change. Tests come before implementation — no exceptions.