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 KhaledSaeed18/dotclaude --skill executing-plansgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/KhaledSaeed18/dotclaudeWrote 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/khaledsaeed18/dotclaude/executing-plans)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/khaledsaeed18/dotclaude/executing-plans"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/khaledsaeed18/dotclaude/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/khaledsaeed18/dotclaude/executing-plans"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/khaledsaeed18/dotclaude/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 | $0.00065 | $0.00688 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00026 | $0.00275 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00013 | $0.00138 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00006 | $0.00069 |
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 28d 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 — 51 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Take a finished implementation plan and turn it into working code, one task at a time, without drifting from what the plan says. The plan has already done the thinking and the decomposition; your job is faithful execution plus the judgement to stop when something is genuinely wrong.
Step 1: Load and review the plan critically
Read the whole plan before doing anything. Don't take it on faith, look for gaps, contradictions, steps that can't work, or instructions you don't actually understand. If you have real concerns, raise them with the user before you start, not halfway through. If it's sound, create a task list from it and begin.
If the work isn't already isolated and the plan calls for it, set up an isolated workspace first with the git-worktrees skill. Never start implementing on main or master without the user's explicit consent.
Step 2: Execute task by task
For each task, in order:
- Mark it in progress.
- Follow each step exactly as written: the steps are deliberately bite-sized, so do them as given rather than collapsing or reordering them.
- Run every verification the plan specifies. Don't skip a test or a build because the code "looks right."
- Mark it complete only once its verifications actually pass.
Don't bundle in changes the plan didn't ask for. If you spot something worth doing that's outside the plan, note it and raise it; don't silently fold it into a task.
Step 3: Stop and ask when blocked
Stop immediately (don't guess or work around it) when:
- You hit a blocker: a missing dependency, a test that won't pass, an unclear instruction.
- The plan has a gap that prevents you from starting or continuing a task.
- A verification keeps failing and you don't understand why.
- The approach itself looks wrong once you're in the code.
Ask for clarification rather than improvising. If the user updates the plan in response, return to Step 1 and re-review the changed parts before continuing.
Step 4: Finish the work
Once every task is done and its verifications pass, don't just stop, wrap up the branch deliberately using the finish-branch skill, which verifies the full test suite and walks through how to integrate the work (merge, PR, keep, or discard).
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.
- 28d ago Changed · +4 lines 07f6fe0475e5
- 1mo ago First seen · 47 lines · 65 tokens per session scan A e2124f74f1bc
executing-plans is a skill published in the GitHub repository KhaledSaeed18/dotclaude (5 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 65 tokens to every session and 688 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
analytics-strategy
Design measurement frameworks including event taxonomy, KPI hierarchy, dashboard architecture, attribution models, and analytics implementation strategy. Use this skill whenever the user wants to plan analytics, design dashboards, build event taxonomies, define KPIs, set up tracking, or audit existing measurement.…
content-strategy
Develop a content strategy covering editorial positioning, content pillars, formats, calendar, governance, and topical authority planning. Use this skill whenever the user wants to plan a content program, define content pillars, build an editorial calendar, structure topic clusters, set up content governance, or align…
agb-begriff-vorformuliert-305
Für AGB Begriff Vorformuliert 305: ordnet Norm, Beweislast und Gegenargument; Ergebnis: Prüfprodukt mit Risiko und nächstem Schritt. Fachgebiet: AGB-Recht-Prüfer. Route: agb-begriff-vorformuliert-305.
review-work
Post-implementation gate review: run manual QA on the real surface yourself, then launch ONE gate reviewer (never a panel) to audit goal, constraints, code quality, security, missed context, and QA evidence. Use before a PR handoff or when the user explicitly asks to review completed work.
agb-rechtswahl-schweizer-recht-rom-i
Für AGB Rechtswahl Schweizer Recht Rom I: ordnet Norm, Beweislast und Gegenargument; Ergebnis: Prüfprodukt mit Risiko und nächstem Schritt. Fachgebiet: AGB-Recht-Prüfer. Route: agb-rechtswahl-schweizer-recht-rom-i.
haftungsdeckel-fuer-daten-und-modelldienste-pruefen
Bewertet Haftungshöchstbeträge bei Datenverlust, fehlerhaften Modellausgaben und Ausfällen digitaler Dienste anhand konkreter Schadensszenarien. Liefert eine Entscheidungsvorlage mit Risikobeträgen, Ausnahmen und Freigabebedarf.