agentleFS
ryanmacleanryanmaclean/skills/ultraplan/SKILL.md

ultraplan

Skill1 starsChanged 51 days agoMITView on GitHub

Council of planners — spawn 4 specialist agents (architect, operator, security, pragmatist) to debate and produce a unified implementation plan. Use for major architectural decisions that affect the fleet.

4 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

3 rules. 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 3 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 2

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 1

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    When "just do it" risks bricking the fleet

    line 13
  2. Distinctive:

    Every agent dispatched through this skill receives the following appended to its prompt automatically:

    line 58
  3. Very specific:

    If the agent's work is purely planning / research / narrative (no state changes — typical for ultraplan), the agent may omit the <claims> …

    line 68

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 3 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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

UltraPlan — Council of Planners

Spawn 4 specialist agents with opposing mandates to stress-test a plan before committing. Each agent argues from their perspective. The orchestrator synthesizes into a unified plan with dissents noted.

When to Use

  • Major architectural changes (embed nu-engine, switch LLM providers, new OS)
  • Cross-cutting decisions that affect all fleet nodes
  • When "just do it" risks bricking the fleet

Council Members

1. Architect

  • Mandate: Elegant design, minimal complexity, clean interfaces
  • Asks: "What's the simplest architecture that solves this?"
  • Rejects: Over-engineering, premature abstraction, unnecessary layers

2. Operator

  • Mandate: Reliability, observability, rollback capability
  • Asks: "How do I debug this at 3am when it breaks?"
  • Rejects: Black boxes, missing logs, no rollback path

3. Security

  • Mandate: Supply chain integrity, least privilege, attack surface
  • Asks: "What can go wrong? What's the blast radius?"
  • Rejects: Trusted binaries, shared secrets, network exposure

4. Pragmatist

  • Mandate: Ship it. Time-to-value. Incremental delivery.
  • Asks: "What's the smallest useful increment we can deploy today?"
  • Rejects: Big-bang migrations, analysis paralysis, perfection

Process

  1. Brief: Orchestrator states the problem and constraints
  2. Independent analysis: Each agent writes their perspective (parallel)
  3. Debate: Cross-review — each agent critiques the others
  4. Synthesis: Orchestrator merges into one plan with:
    • Consensus items (all agree)
    • Compromises (2-3 agree, dissent noted)
    • Blockers (any agent can veto with justification)
  5. Output: Single plan document with phases, tasks, and risk register

Invocation

/ultraplan <topic>

The orchestrator spawns 4 agents, collects their analyses, runs the debate round, and produces the final plan.

Verification contract (auto-injected by proveryay)

Every agent dispatched through this skill receives the following appended to its prompt automatically:

<see ~/.claude/skills/proveryay/CLAIMS-TEMPLATE.md — injected verbatim>

This means every agent MUST emit a <claims> block when it makes any deployment/state-change assertion. The proveryay SubagentStop hook will verify each claim in parallel and inject structured verdicts into the dispatcher's next-turn context.

If the agent's work is purely planning / research / narrative (no state changes — typical for ultraplan), the agent may omit the <claims> block. Proveryay treats absence as silent (no noise).

Invocation example with template injection:

# Prompt injection: template auto-appended (idempotent)
PROMPT="${ORIGINAL_PROMPT}

$(cat ~/.claude/skills/proveryay/CLAIMS-TEMPLATE.md)"

See:

  • ~/.claude/skills/proveryay/SKILL.md — hook behavior
  • ~/.claude/skills/proveryay/CLAIMS-TEMPLATE.md — canonical format
  • ~/.claude/skills/fleet-eval/SKILL.md — probe taxonomy

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.