Oh My Claude Code is a multi-agent orchestration system for Claude Code, coordinating specialized agents, commands, skills, hooks, and workflows. It is designed for developers who want Claude Code to handle coding tasks through coordinated agent roles. Catalogue entries are components of its Claude Code workflow, including agents, commands, skills, hooks, instructions, MCP configuration, and a plugin.
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 Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecode --skill launchgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecodeWrote 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/yeachan-heo/oh-my-claudecode/launch)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/yeachan-heo/oh-my-claudecode/launch"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/yeachan-heo/oh-my-claudecode/launch/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/yeachan-heo/oh-my-claudecode/launch"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/yeachan-heo/oh-my-claudecode/launch.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- Snyk pass
- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 2 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 44 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 90 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.
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 | $0.00113 | $0.04098 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00056 | $0.02049 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00023 | $0.00820 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00410 |
Grade A, and why
launch 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 4d 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 — 153 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Launch
Launch is the shipyard's delivery run: from mission brief to shipped, verified change. It stands on the verifiability boundary — agents continuously run everything repeatable and acceptable-by-evidence; humans decide what cannot be judged by the system or what fails expensively. The goal is not maximum automation — it is maximum delegation of verifiable work, so the human's time is spent only on the decisions only a human can make.
The verifiability test, applied to every step: if this is done wrong, can the system detect it? Can it redo or roll back automatically? Both yes → agent. No unique answer, system cannot judge, or expensive to get wrong → human.
Launch assumes the shipyard exists — and refuses to run if it does not. The yard gate is the first action of every invocation, before document-language resolution and before reading any supplied spec:
- Run the full drydock
--checkaudit — missing surfaces, a missing or invalidCONTEXT.mdfrontmatterdocumentLanguage, dead paths, glossary terms unused in code, standards never referenced. This is the single criterion: Launch performs no separate facility inventory of its own. - Actionable / high-confidence findings hard-block the run: list every such finding verbatim, point at
/oh-my-claudecode:drydock, state that the run never started and no artifacts were produced, and stop. Without an explicit override, treat any finding as blocking. - Narrow override (explicit intent only): low-confidence findings, findings explicitly classified as false positives in the drydock report, or a scratch/throwaway repository explicitly declared by the user may be overridden only with deliberate, per-invocation user intent — the override must name the finding(s) or the throwaway scope and must never silently swallow a high-confidence actionable finding. No general bypass flag.
- Current audit limitation: today
--checkis a skill-instruction checklist without a machine-readable finding/severity contract or executable — severity classification relies on the drydock report's wording until a structured contract exists. A machine-readable finding/severity exit contract is the intended follow-up; the gate wording stays honest about what it can and cannot rely on mechanically. - A clean audit (or an explicitly overridden low-confidence/false-positive/scratch scope) admits the run. Every paper-trail slot (
CONTEXT.md,docs/adr/,docs/business/) and facility surface already exists at that point; Launch fills the paper trail as decisions settle but never creates the slots. - The rules entry is
CLAUDE.md— the shipyard map recognizes no substitute.
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.
- 4d ago Changed · +5 lines · +35 tokens per session 18f25b700e51
- 5d ago Changed · +23 lines 100fa8822775
- 7d ago First seen · 125 lines · 78 tokens per session scan A db75b580df9e
launch is a skill published in the GitHub repository Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-claudecode (39,083 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 113 tokens to every session and 4,098 once invoked, about $0.0006 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
inbound-triage
Triage raw human-channel input pasted directly into the session (chat exports, email threads, PR comments, meeting notes) — or dropped as files in a project inbox — into typed, deduplicated, decision-ready items with numbered recommendations. Strictly selection-gated — nothing dispatches without an explicit operator…
worktrees
Manage Git worktrees as OMO safe isolated coding lanes for complex, risky, or parallel work.
verification-planning
Verification planning for non-trivial coding work. Use before implementing a feature, bug fix, refactor, cross-system change, or high-confidence behavior change that needs a credible project-specific evidence path.
loop-engineering
Loop engineering runtime Grill + Monitor.
speckit-workflow
Comprehensive understanding of the spec-kit methodology. Constitution-driven feature development with specify, plan, tasks, and implement phases.
sdlc-accelerate
End-to-end SDLC ramp-up from idea to construction-ready with automated phase transitions.