executing-plans
Skill17 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub
Execute a written implementation plan with review checkpoints and structured progress tracking. Use when you have a spec or plan ready to implement, when user says "execute this plan", "implement this spec", "carry out these steps", or "start working on the plan".
189 other projects use a version of this, 110 of them edited.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- DemonDamon/AgenticXedited, first seen Nov 9, 2026
- PabloBuilder/AgenticAxelortheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- roundpilot/superpowers-antigravitytheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- REPOZY/superpowers-optimizedtheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- lingyired/status-triotheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- BrightGold70/skillsedited, first seen Nov 8, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use chinese-code-review, chinese-commit-conventions and 10 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
Leodorareluctant259Skillchinese-code-review
中文代码审查规范——在保持专业严谨的同时,用符合国内团队文化的方式给出有效反馈
Also in 8 projects that use this
Leodorareluctant259Skillchinese-commit-conventions
中文 Git 提交规范 — 适配国内团队的 commit message 规范和 changelog 自动化
Also in 8 projects that use this
obraSkilldiagnosing-superpowers
Use when a superpowers session went wrong and your human partner wants to know why — repeated work, ignored plans, stumbles, poor results, a skill that didn't fire, "it took too long", "why is it so expensive", "what is it doing" — or wants to build a bug report for the superpowers maintainers, for the current session or a past one identified by id or path, on any harness.
Also in 20 projects that use this
allanninalSkillalgorand-vulnerability-scanner
Scans Algorand smart contracts for 11 common vulnerabilities including rekeying attacks, unchecked transaction fees, missing field validations, and access control issues. Use when auditing Algorand projects (TEAL/PyTeal). (project, gitignored)
Also in 4 projects that use this
allanninalSkillcairo-vulnerability-scanner
Scans Cairo/StarkNet smart contracts for 6 critical vulnerabilities including felt252 arithmetic overflow, L1-L2 messaging issues, address conversion problems, and signature replay. Use when auditing StarkNet projects. (project, gitignored)
Also in 4 projects that use this
farslabSkillaws-agentic-ai
AWS Bedrock AgentCore comprehensive expert for deploying and managing AI agents at scale. Use when working with any AgentCore service including Gateway, Runtime, Memory, Identity, Code Interpreter, Browser, Observability, Agent Registry, or Evaluations. Covers agent deployment, MCP tool integration, credential management, agent discovery, governance workflows, and automated quality assessment. Essential when user mentions AgentCore, agent runtime, agent registry, agent evaluation, MCP gateway, deploy agent, register MCP server, discover agents, evaluate agent quality, agent credentials, or wants to build, deploy, catalog, or monitor AI agents on AWS.
Also in 3 projects that use this
- +3 more from Leodorareluctant259
- +1 more from allanninal
Other versions189 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 110
- openai/plugins★ 7.8k21% same
- farm-fe/farm★ 5.6k21% same
- DemonDamon/AgenticX★ 1k35% same
- coco-research/coco★ 79721% same
- koaning/wigglystuff★ 45520% same
- derHaken/SuperAntigravity★ 43918% same
- theexperiencecompany/gaia★ 32534% same
- Asvarox/allkaraoke★ 26933% same
- totvs/engpro-advpl-tlpp-skills★ 16634% same
- haojing8312/WorkClaw★ 14134% same
100 more not listed
Wrote their own version · 79
- obra/superpowers★ 314ksame name
- jnMetaCode/superpowers-zh★ 8.4ksame name
- lingyired/status-trio★ 1.8ksame name
- GanyuanRan/Aegis★ 1.4ksame name
- pcvelz/superpowers★ 1.3ksame name
- Ibrahim-3d/conductor-orchestrator-superpowers★ 381same name
- Ibrahim-3d/orchestrator-supaconductor★ 378same name
- LayneChai/superpowers-dsh★ 150same name
- REPOZY/superpowers-optimized★ 146same name
- The-AIOS/aios★ 105same name
69 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository60 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- agent-browserSkill
- agent-engineeringSkill
- app-marketing-copySkill
- ascii-pixel-artSkill
- autopredictSkill
- autoresearchSkill
- babysit-prSkill
- bird-fastSkill
- blockchain-auditorSkill
- brainstormingSkill
- ceo-reviewSkill
- ck-reviewSkill
- cloudflare-managerSkill
- codex-advisorSkill
- content-trend-researcherSkill
- continuous-learningSkill
- coreml-optimizerSkill
- cto-reviewSkill
- direct-mail-strategistSkill
- evangelion-designSkill
- freshdesk-apiSkill
- gemini-image-generatorSkill
- gemini-visualSkill
- github-actions-templatesSkill
- googleSkill
- gsplat-optimizerSkill
- hyperagentSkill
- idea-mdSkill
- imagegenSkill
- ios-app-testerSkill
- llm-advisorSkill
- llm-evaluationSkill
- macos-appsSkill
- markdown-fetchSkill
- mcp-builderSkill
- mcp-testerSkill
- nano-bananaSkill
- opensea-apiSkill
- paperclipSkill
- playdate-devSkill
- poke-assistantSkill
- poplar-direct-mailSkill
- practical-typographySkill
- prompt-factorySkill
- qmdSkill
- scientific-critical-thinkingSkill
- security-best-practicesSkill
- security-threat-modelSkill
- seo-optimizerSkill
- shadertoySkill
- skill-finderSkill
- skimmableSkill
- subway-infoSkill
- systematic-debuggingSkill
- tui-designerSkill
- ui-designSkill
- video-editorSkill
- writing-plansSkill
The file
Show its rules and text
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
20 rules. 3 are common, 17 are distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
3
Common
Most of the 178 edited versions we read keep these.
17
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 19
Read the plan file completely
- Distinctive: line 25
If concerns exist: Raise them with your partner before proceeding.
- Distinctive: line 26
If the plan looks solid: Create a todo tracker and proceed to Step 2
- Distinctive: line 35
Follow the plan's steps exactly — they're designed to be small and verifiable
- Distinctive: line 36
Run the specified verifications before marking done — this catches mistakes early
- Distinctive: line 37
If verification fails: stop, report it, and wait for guidance
- Distinctive: line 38
If verification passes: mark as completed and move to the next task
- Distinctive: line 40
Keep focus tight. Executing 3 tasks well and getting feedback is faster than executing 10 tasks blind and discovering you went the wrong …
- Distinctive: line 43
When the batch is done, report clearly:
- Distinctive: line 57
Follow their guidance. The loop (Execute → Report → Feedback → Continue) prevents you from diverging.
- Distinctive: line 63
After all tasks complete and verified, finalize the branch.
- Distinctive: line 65
Run the full test suite one final time
- Distinctive: line 67
Ask the user: merge now, open a PR, or leave for manual review
- Common: line 89
Follow plan steps exactly
- Common: line 90
Don't skip verifications
- Common: line 93
Stop when blocked, don't guess
- Distinctive: line 94
Never start implementation on main/master branch without explicit user consent
- Distinctive: line 117
How to avoid it: If verification fails, that task is not done.
- Distinctive: line 124
How to avoid it: After reporting each batch, read your partner's response carefully.
- Distinctive: line 132
Git worktree tip: Before executing a plan, consider running in an isolated git worktree so your work is sandboxed from main:
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 178 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Executing Plans
Overview
Load plan, review critically, execute tasks in batches, report for review between batches.
Core principle: Batch execution with checkpoints for architect review.
Announce at start: "I'm using the executing-plans skill to implement this plan."
The Process
Step 1: Load and Review Plan
- Read the plan file completely
- Review it critically — this is where you catch flaws before they become expensive rework. Look for:
- Steps that seem vague or contradictory
- Missing dependencies or setup
- Assumptions that don't hold in your actual codebase
- Technical choices you'd question
- If concerns exist: Raise them with your partner before proceeding. Getting alignment now saves many hours of wrong execution
- If the plan looks solid: Create a todo tracker and proceed to Step 2
Step 2: Execute Batch
Default: First 3 tasks per batch
The checkpoint-driven approach (3 tasks, pause for feedback, continue) gives your partner visibility and prevents you from building on a flawed foundation.
For each task in the batch:
- Mark it as in_progress in your tracker
- Follow the plan's steps exactly — they're designed to be small and verifiable
- Run the specified verifications before marking done — this catches mistakes early
- If verification fails: stop, report it, and wait for guidance
- If verification passes: mark as completed and move to the next task
Keep focus tight. Executing 3 tasks well and getting feedback is faster than executing 10 tasks blind and discovering you went the wrong direction halfway through.
Step 3: Report
When the batch is done, report clearly:
- Show what was implemented (what changed, new files, modified code)
- Show verification output (test results, error messages if any)
- Summarize any unexpected findings or minor deviations from the plan
- End with: "Ready for feedback."
This pause-to-report is critical. It gives your partner a chance to course-correct before you invest more work.
Step 4: Continue
Your partner will respond. They might:
- Approve and ask you to continue (execute next batch)
- Point out an issue and ask for changes (go back to Step 1 or Step 2)
- Change the plan based on new information (return to Step 1)
Follow their guidance. The loop (Execute → Report → Feedback → Continue) prevents you from diverging.
Once you've completed all batches and your partner approves, move to Step 5 (Complete Development).
Step 5: Complete Development
After all tasks complete and verified, finalize the branch. Verify all tests pass, ensure the working tree is clean, and then present options to the user: merge to main, open a PR, or keep the branch for further review.
- Run the full test suite one final time
- Confirm no untracked or uncommitted changes remain
- Ask the user: merge now, open a PR, or leave for manual review
When to Stop and Ask for Help
Execution should pause for clarification when:
- You hit a blocker mid-batch (missing dependency, test fails, instruction unclear) — continuing blind wastes effort
- The plan has critical gaps preventing starting — you can't execute what doesn't exist
- You don't understand an instruction — guessing is slower than asking
- Verification fails repeatedly — this signals the plan may have flawed assumptions
Why this matters: Stopping early prevents wasted work and lets your partner give you the right guidance. It's faster to pause and clarify than to build on a wrong foundation.
When to Revisit Earlier Steps
Return to Review (Step 1) when:
- Your partner updates the plan based on your feedback — old review isn't valid anymore
- Fundamental approach needs rethinking — new information changes strategy
Forcing through blockers creates debt. A pause to reconsider is faster than fixing mistakes later.
Remember
- Review plan critically first
- Follow plan steps exactly
- Don't skip verifications
- Reference skills when plan says to
- Between batches: just report and wait
- Stop when blocked, don't guess
- Never start implementation on main/master branch without explicit user consent
Common Pitfalls
Agent Skips Review and Starts Executing Immediately
The problem: Jumping straight to Step 2 (Execute Batch) without doing Step 1 (Load and Review Plan). This skips your chance to catch plan flaws before wasting work.
Why it happens: Execution feels more productive than reading; the urge to "just start" is strong.
How to avoid it: Force yourself to read the plan, write down questions, and raise them before marking the first task in_progress. Your review step is the highest-leverage time to prevent rework.
Batch Size Too Large Causes Confusion
The problem: Trying to execute 10+ tasks in a batch makes it hard to track what's done, what's blocked, and where verification failed. You lose the checkpoint benefit.
Why it happens: Wanting to move fast, or misunderstanding "default: first 3 tasks" as a minimum instead of a safe default.
How to avoid it: Stick to 3 tasks per batch unless the plan explicitly says otherwise. After you report and get feedback, you'll know if you should do bigger batches. Smaller batches = clearer reporting = faster feedback loops.
Verification Failures Ignored
The problem: A verification fails (test doesn't pass, output doesn't match expected), but you mark the task completed anyway and move on. This compounds — later tasks depend on earlier ones working.
Why it happens: The temptation to "mark it done" and push forward. Verification feels like optional polish.
How to avoid it: If verification fails, that task is not done. Stop the batch, report the failure, and wait for guidance. The plan may have a flaw or you may have misunderstood a step. Your partner needs to know.
Plan Becomes Stale Mid-Execution
The problem: You're halfway through executing, and your partner realizes the plan needs updating (scope changed, tech choice was wrong, new blocker discovered). But you keep executing the old plan.
Why it happens: You're focused on the tasks in front of you; you don't realize the plan has been superseded.
How to avoid it: After reporting each batch, read your partner's response carefully. If they mention plan changes, go back to Step 1 (Review) even if you're already partway through. Fresh context beats forward momentum.
Integration
Related workflow skills:
- writing-plans — Generates the plan that this skill executes. This skill assumes a well-structured plan exists; if you need to create one, refer to that skill first.
- brainstorming — Produces the design that feeds into writing-plans. Run brainstorming → writing-plans → executing-plans for the full workflow.
Git worktree tip: Before executing a plan, consider running in an isolated git worktree so your work is sandboxed from main:
git worktree add ../feature-work -b feature/my-featureThis prevents accidents on main and lets you abandon bad experiments cleanly.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

