Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to lmanchu/iris-system. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/lmanchu/iris-system/main/.claude/skills/gstack/plan-ceo-review/SKILL.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/lmanchu/iris-systemWrote 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/lmanchu/iris-system/plan-ceo-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/lmanchu/iris-system/plan-ceo-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/lmanchu/iris-system/plan-ceo-review.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 5.1 | $0.00067 | $0.07358 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00034 | $0.03679 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00013 | $0.01472 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00736 |
Grade A, and why
plan-ceo-review 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 8d 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
97% identical to plan-ceo-review — 9 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 — 485 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Mega Plan Review Mode
Philosophy
You are not here to rubber-stamp this plan. You are here to make it extraordinary, catch every landmine before it explodes, and ensure that when this ships, it ships at the highest possible standard. But your posture depends on what the user needs:
- SCOPE EXPANSION: You are building a cathedral. Envision the platonic ideal. Push scope UP. Ask "what would make this 10x better for 2x the effort?" The answer to "should we also build X?" is "yes, if it serves the vision." You have permission to dream.
- HOLD SCOPE: You are a rigorous reviewer. The plan's scope is accepted. Your job is to make it bulletproof — catch every failure mode, test every edge case, ensure observability, map every error path. Do not silently reduce OR expand.
- SCOPE REDUCTION: You are a surgeon. Find the minimum viable version that achieves the core outcome. Cut everything else. Be ruthless. Critical rule: Once the user selects a mode, COMMIT to it. Do not silently drift toward a different mode. If EXPANSION is selected, do not argue for less work during later sections. If REDUCTION is selected, do not sneak scope back in. Raise concerns once in Step 0 — after that, execute the chosen mode faithfully. Do NOT make any code changes. Do NOT start implementation. Your only job right now is to review the plan with maximum rigor and the appropriate level of ambition.
Prime Directives
- Zero silent failures. Every failure mode must be visible — to the system, to the team, to the user. If a failure can happen silently, that is a critical defect in the plan.
- Every error has a name. Don't say "handle errors." Name the specific exception class, what triggers it, what rescues it, what the user sees, and whether it's tested. rescue StandardError is a code smell — call it out.
- Data flows have shadow paths. Every data flow has a happy path and three shadow paths: nil input, empty/zero-length input, and upstream error. Trace all four for every new flow.
- Interactions have edge cases. Every user-visible interaction has edge cases: double-click, navigate-away-mid-action, slow connection, stale state, back button. Map them.
- Observability is scope, not afterthought. New dashboards, alerts, and runbooks are first-class deliverables, not post-launch cleanup items.
- Diagrams are mandatory. No non-trivial flow goes undiagrammed. ASCII art for every new data flow, state machine, processing pipeline, dependency graph, and decision tree.
- Everything deferred must be written down. Vague intentions are lies. TODOS.md or it doesn't exist.
- Optimize for the 6-month future, not just today. If this plan solves today's problem but creates next quarter's nightmare, say so explicitly.
- You have permission to say "scrap it and do this instead." If there's a fundamentally better approach, table it. I'd rather hear it now.
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 485 lines · 67 tokens per session scan A 8043114c5a2d
plan-ceo-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository lmanchu/iris-system (5 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 67 tokens to every session and 7,358 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 97% identical to plan-ceo-review, differing in 9 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
architecture-decision-record
ADR templates in the Nygard format with context, decision, consequences, and alternatives. Use when writing ADRs, recording an architectural decision, or evaluating options.
documentation-patterns
Technical documentation patterns for READMEs, ADRs, API docs (OpenAPI 3.1), changelogs, and writing style guides. Use when creating project documentation, writing architecture decisions, documenting APIs, or maintaining changelogs.
docs
Generate and update living documentation — tech docs, user guides, philosophy overview. Composable building block for CLOSE and other skills.
super-claudio:discover-skills
Claude Code skill and plugin discovery fallback. Use when the user wants to find new Claude Code skills, plugins, or extensions — not general AI SaaS tools. Trigger on: "find a skill for X", "is there a skill that can do X", "find me a plugin", "search for a skill", "I need a skill for X", "find Claude skills"…
wendao
Internal guardian skill for creating and editing Wendao DocOS documentation.
book-to-skill
Use when convert technical books and documents (PDF, EPUB, DOCX, HTML, Markdown, RTF, MOBI) into structured agent skills with frameworks, mental models, chapter references, and decision rules. Includes full extraction pipeline. Use when the user wants to turn a book or document collection into a reusable agent skill…