Agent skill

Ulw Plan

by rlaope in rlaope/oh-my-hermes

[omh] High-stakes technical proposal needing approval: consensus planning with review gates.

MITAuto-check passedProduct & Project Management

Install Ulw Plan

skills CLI
$ npx skills add rlaope/oh-my-hermes --skill ulw-plan -a claude-code

Project install by default; add -g for ~/.claude/skills/.

GitHub CLI
$ gh skill install rlaope/oh-my-hermes ulw-plan --agent claude-code

Project scope by default; add --scope user for a personal install. Needs GitHub CLI 2.90.0 or later (public preview).

Manual copy
$ git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/rlaope/oh-my-hermes.git skills-src && mkdir -p .claude/skills && cp -r skills-src/skills/ulw-plan .claude/skills/ulw-plan && rm -rf skills-src

Use ~/.claude/skills/ instead of .claude/skills for a personal install. The folder must contain SKILL.md.

Claude Code skills documentation · loads skills from .claude/skills/

Facts

Skill name
ulw-plan
GitHub stars
3.2k
Token cost
~2.7k tokens
SKILL.md length
1,414 words
Files
1
Skills in repo
143
Repo updated
First seen
Licence
MIT

At a glance

[omh] High-stakes technical proposal needing approval: consensus planning with review gates.

  • The user says: ralplan
  • SKILL.md covers Why This Exists, First Steps, Do Not Use When and Examples, plus 6 more sections
  • Instructions only: no scripts, shell commands, URLs or credentials in SKILL.md
  • Acceptance criteria

What it does

Ulw Plan is an agent skill from rlaope/oh-my-hermes. [omh] High-stakes technical proposal needing approval: consensus planning with review gates. Use when the user says: ralplan, consensus plan, reviewed plan, issue to PR, acceptance criteria, verification command, reviewable PR, risky planning.

Its SKILL.md is about 2.7k tokens, which your agent loads only when the skill is triggered. It is a single SKILL.md file with no bundled scripts.

It sits in Product & Project Management, covering User stories and Human-in-the-loop approvals. The repository describes itself as: All in one plugin for Hermes Agent ⚚ the coding intelligence, a long-term memory system and model optimized workflow packages. The licence is MIT.

When your agent uses it

  • The user says: ralplan
  • Acceptance criteria
  • Verification command

Example prompts

  • “/ulw-plan”

What it can do on your machine

Read from SKILL.md and the folder at commit 41de9dc. It shows what the files ask for, not the result of running them.

  • Tool permissions

    Pre-approves nothing: there is no allowed-tools line, so your agent's usual permission prompts apply.

    From allowed-tools in the SKILL.md frontmatter.

  • Runs code

    No scripts in the folder and no shell commands in SKILL.md (its code samples are bash).

    From the folder's file list and the shell code blocks in SKILL.md.

  • Network

    No URLs in SKILL.md.

    From URLs in SKILL.md, links to its own repository left out.

  • Credentials

    Names no API keys, tokens, secrets or passwords.

    From names ending in _API_KEY, _TOKEN, _SECRET, _KEY or _PASSWORD in SKILL.md.

Context cost

Ulw Plan loads about 2.7k tokens when it runs. Until then it costs about 63 tokens; SKILL.md has 1,414 words of instructions outside code blocks.

Always · name and description, kept in context so the agent knows when to use it
~63
When it runs · the whole SKILL.md, loaded when a task matches
~2.7k

Estimates: characters ÷ 4, the usual rule of thumb; real counts depend on the model's tokenizer. Scripts and assets cost tokens only if the agent reads them.

Safety

Auto-check passed

The automated check found no risky patterns in SKILL.md.

Automated static check — not a guarantee. Review scripts before installing. It scans the text of SKILL.md for risky patterns (piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files, hidden Unicode, destructive commands); files beside SKILL.md are not scanned.

SKILL.md

The full file from rlaope/oh-my-hermes at commit 41de9dc, republished under its MIT licence (© rlaope). 1,414 words, ~2,732 tokens.

Download SKILL.mdSave it as .claude/skills/ulw-plan/SKILL.md (or your agent's skills folder).
name
ulw-plan
description
[omh] High-stakes technical proposal needing approval: consensus planning with review gates. Use when the user says: ralplan, consensus plan, reviewed plan, issue to PR, acceptance criteria, verification command, reviewable PR, risky planning.

Ralplan

This is a Hermes-native ralplan workflow skill.

Why This Exists

ralplan exists to make planning reviewable before execution: Hermes should gather codebase/source facts, compare options, expose risks, define acceptance criteria, and prepare a handoff without pretending implementation already happened.

First Steps

  • Initialize the plan todo before the first planning step: declare the planning stages as omh_todo items (todo init) — repo facts and evidence check, options and tradeoffs, risk review, acceptance criteria and verification commands, plan record and acceptance — keep exactly one item active, and when the evidence check reveals a gap rewrite the list (omh_todo action=set) to insert the research stage; update the list as stages complete so the HUD todo panel shows plan progress as a bounded checklist, and treat items as declarations, never execution evidence. Phase names and task titles are written in English — short, operator-legible labels — even when the conversation runs in another language, since the HUD todo checklist is an operator surface under the repo's English-by-default output contract.

Do Not Use When

  • The request is still too ambiguous to name requirements, non-goals, or acceptance criteria; use deep-interview first.
  • The user asks for one full research-plan-implementation-review-PR cycle; use ultrawork (its delivery_boundary capability) and keep ralplan as the planning stage.
  • The change is a small local refactor or cleanup with no architectural or regression risk; use ultrawork, or ai-slop-cleaner when observable behavior must stay identical.
  • The refactor's direction is already decided and what is missing is its execution shape - which files move in which phase, what verifies each phase, where each phase rolls back to; use refactor-plan.
  • One plan-blocking choice still needs behavior evidence rather than argument; run decision-prototype first and consume its decision receipt without transcript replay.
  • The user wants a pure source lookup, citation check, or paper explanation with no implementation plan.
  • The unresolved work is repository terminology alignment or a project-language decision frontier; use context before planning.

Examples

Good example:

  • Prompt: $ralplan turn this risky refactor into a reviewable plan with acceptance criteria and verification commands.
  • Expected behavior: Produce repo/source facts, alternatives, risk review, acceptance criteria, exact verification commands, and handoff readiness without editing code.
  • Why: The request is clear enough to plan but risky enough to require consensus-style review before execution.

Bad example:

  • Prompt: $ralplan implement the refactor now and open the PR.
  • Expected behavior: Stop at the reviewed plan or route the full delivery cycle to ultrawork after plan acceptance.
  • Why: Ralplan is a planning gate, not implementation, review, CI, or PR evidence.

Completion Checklist

  • The plan todo was declared before the first planning step and every stage reached a terminal state; a plan produced without one, or with stages still pending, is not finished.
  • Observed repo facts and source/web evidence gaps are named.
  • At least two options or one chosen option plus rejected alternatives are recorded.
  • Risks, acceptance criteria, and verification commands are testable or explicitly blocked.
  • The plan exists as a recorded file-backed artifact, not only as chat narration.
  • The implementation handoff is prepared only after plan acceptance and remains prepared_not_observed.
  • The follow-on engine or executor path was started only after the user's explicit go-ahead in this conversation, never from plan acceptance alone.

Recovery Notes

  • If requirements are still fuzzy, route back to deep-interview before planning.
  • If current-source evidence is missing, route a research step before accepting the plan.
  • If the user asks for implementation after acceptance, recommend the follow-on path that fits the work's shape (ultrawork with the matching capability — durable checkpoint, coordinated lanes, single-owner persistence, or one delivery cycle — or a direct selected executor handoff) with a one-line fit reason, and start it only on the user's explicit go-ahead — never auto-start an engine from acceptance alone.

Workflow Lane

  • Current lane: Intent -> plan (oh-my-hermes, meta-router, deep-interview, context, plan, ralplan, adversarial-consensus, codebase-onboarding, +8 more) - clarify, plan, ship, or loop goals.
  • If intent belongs to another lane, hand back to oh-my-hermes or name the adjacent workflow.
  • Shared product, routing, compatibility, and evidence rules: omh-routing/references/skill-common-rail.md.

Use When

Use when requirements are clear enough for planning but architecture, evidence, alternatives, risks, or tests need a reviewed plan before execution.

Strong routing signals: `ralplan`, `$ralplan`, `consensus plan`, `reviewed plan`, `issue to PR`, `acceptance criteria`, `verification command`, `reviewable PR`, `risky planning`, `dangerous planning`, `unsafe change`, `refactor safety`, `PR로 만들`, `PR로 만들 수 있게`, `위험한 리팩터링`, `리팩터링 위험`, `리스크 있는 리팩터링`, `검증 command`, `리뷰 가능한 단위`, `코드베이스 조사`, `웹리서치 계획`, `대안 비교`, `리스크 검토`
Show full SKILL.md (686 more words)Show less

Catalog Metadata

Category: planning Phase: reviewed-plan Hermes role: planner Quality tier: reviewed-plan-gated Reasoning demand: standard

Quality bar:

  • Start from observed repo facts and source/web evidence when freshness or external behavior matters.
  • Include planner view, critic/risk review, alternative paths, rejected options, and a testability check before handoff.
  • Produce testable acceptance criteria and exact verification commands or explain why they are not yet knowable.
  • List every lane of the accepted plan in node-prompt shape - TASK, DELIVERABLE, SCOPE, VERIFY, STOP WHEN - with depends_on per lane, so ultrawork can prepare board rows from the plan without re-planning; planning itself stays a bounded in-session lane.
  • Record unresolved tradeoffs and evidence gaps instead of flattening uncertainty.
  • When plan-shaping evidence is missing — current external behavior, contested claims, or unstudied reference implementations — run the research workflow as a bounded in-plan stage (not an exhaustive deep-research run) before comparing options, record its dossier the way the research artifact contract requires, and consume it instead of planning on assumptions.
  • Consume a recorded research dossier when one exists: plan options and rejected alternatives should cite its decision drivers and verified claims.
  • End with a selected executor/runtime handoff shape only after the plan is accepted.
  • Plan acceptance approves the plan content, not execution: after acceptance, recommend the follow-on path that fits the work's shape — ultrawork durable checkpoints for progress that must survive sessions as a checkpointed ledger, ultrawork coordinated lanes for an accepted plan split into disjoint parallel lanes, ultrawork single-owner persistence for one already-scoped task with a single owner, ultrawork for one bounded delivery cycle, or a direct selected executor/runtime handoff for a single prepared coding change — state the fit reason in one line, and start it only after the user's explicit go-ahead.
  • Do not implement directly from consensus planning.

Handoff policy:

Keep consensus planning and review in Hermes; produce explicit selected executor/runtime handoff guidance only after the plan is accepted, and start a follow-on workflow engine only after the user explicitly confirms the recommended path.

Required inputs:

  • requirements
  • codebase facts
  • source or web evidence when needed, or an in-plan research stage to obtain it
  • options
  • tradeoffs
  • test shape

Expected outputs:

  • reviewed plan
  • acceptance criteria
  • risk register
  • verification commands
  • handoff guidance

Artifact expectations:

  • record the plan with omh hermes plan --record, which writes <repo>/.omh/plans/<slug>.md inside a repository and the user-scope OMH store outside one
  • mark acceptance with omh hermes plan-accept <path> so acceptance_recorded and handoff_ready point at a real artifact

Safety rules:

  • Do not implement directly from the planning lane.
  • Do not invent codebase or web evidence; label missing evidence and source gaps.
  • Make acceptance criteria testable.
  • Record unresolved tradeoffs explicitly.
  • Keep rejected options and handoff readiness separate from accepted execution evidence.
  • Write plan artifacts only through the named omh hermes plan commands under <repo>/.omh/plans/; never write plans or planning state into .omc/** or any other wrapper's state root — .omc/ belongs to oh-my-claudecode, a different product.

Runtime Evidence

Preferred harness for this skill: planning.

sh
omh runtime record --skill ralplan --harness planning --status started

Record observed delegation results; otherwise return not_available or not_observed. Prepared OMH routing is not execution, review, CI, merge-readiness, or merge evidence.

  • When wrapper metadata includes memory_review_card/v1 or handoff_context_pack/v1, treat it as reviewed OMH-local or wrapper-supplied context only. Use conflict-free context summaries to shape plans and handoffs, but do not claim Hermes internal memory was read or changed. Preserve workflow intent and stop conditions; verify before claiming completion. Reply in the user's own words and the host's own voice: its SOUL.md persona owns reply language, tone, speech level, and sentence endings, progress updates included (where it sets no language, use the one the user wrote in), and OMH shapes structure and content only; OMH's record terms (surface, lane, wrapper, handoff, evidence boundary, not_observed) stay in records and tool calls, never in the sentence the user reads unless they ask about one; and when a stop condition or a decision the user owns ends the turn, offer the next action as a question rather than declaring what will not be done.

Use Hermes-native subagent/delegation features when available: native subagents -> Hermes delegation when available, otherwise sequential lanes.

Shared product, compatibility, topology, memory, harness, and execution rules: omh-routing/references/skill-common-rail.md. Load it when applicable; otherwise name an unavailable capability.

© rlaope, MIT. Rendered from Markdown: HTML in the file is shown as text, images as links, and headings moved down two levels. Raw file

Files

Just SKILL.md in skills/ulw-plan of rlaope/oh-my-hermes.

Open the folder on GitHubat commit 41de9dc

Compare with similar skills

Ulw Plan next to the 5 skills that share the most tags, products or categories with it. Stars are the repository's; “used in” counts other GitHub owners with a copy.

Ulw Plan compared with similar skills
SkillStarsUsed inTokensAuto-checkLicenceRepo updated
Ulw Plan this skillrlaope/oh-my-hermes3.2k—~2.7kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Spec Generatorcatlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow2.1k—~4.3kAutomated safety check: NotesMIT
Spec Generatorcatlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow2.1k—~7.2kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Project Planneradrianpuiu/claude-skills-marketplace1001 repos~6kAutomated safety check: PassNone
Sdd Work Decompositionmagnus919/hermes-profiles282—~1.4kAutomated safety check: PassMIT
Feature ForgeJeffallan/claude-skills12k—~1.1kAutomated safety check: PassMIT

Similar skills

  • Spec Generator

    catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow

    Specification generator - 7 phase document chain producing product brief, PRD, architecture, epics, and issues with Codex review gates.

    2.1k GitHub stars~4.3k tokensUpdated 3 mo ago
    Product & Project ManagementAuto-check: notes
  • Spec Generator

    catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow

    Specification generator - 7 phase document chain producing product brief, PRD, architecture, epics, and issues.

    2.1k GitHub stars~7.2k tokensUpdated 3 mo ago
    Product & Project ManagementAuto-check passed
  • Project Planner

    adrianpuiu/claude-skills-marketplace

    Comprehensive project planning and documentation generator for software projects.

    100 GitHub starsUsed in 1 repo~6k tokens
    Product & Project ManagementAuto-check passed
  • Sdd Work Decomposition

    magnus919/hermes-profiles

    SDD work decomposition — translates formal specifications into dependency-aware task plans with per-task acceptance criteria.

    282 GitHub stars~1.4k tokensUpdated 3 mo ago
    Product & Project ManagementAuto-check passed
  • Feature Forge

    Jeffallan/claude-skills

    Runs a structured requirements interview to produce a feature specification with EARS requirements, acceptance criteria and an implementation checklist.

    12k GitHub stars~1.1k tokensUpdated 6 days ago
    Product & Project ManagementAuto-check passed
  • Refactor Design Report

    penwyp/ClaudePreference

    Produce a professional, code-grounded refactor or implementation design report from identified technical problems, product gaps, review findings, architecture concerns, or frontend-backend contract…

    136 GitHub stars~1.4k tokensUpdated 4 mo ago
    Product & Project ManagementAuto-check passed

More from rlaope/oh-my-hermes

All 143 skills in this repo
  • Omh Accessibility Audit

    rlaope/oh-my-hermes

    [omh] Screen-reader or keyboard accessibility gaps: prepare WCAG, keyboard, focus, screen-reader, target-size, and reflow evidence gates for UI surfaces.

    3.2k GitHub stars~2.8k tokensUpdated yesterday
    Auto-check passed
  • Omh Agent Evaluation

    rlaope/oh-my-hermes

    [omh] Choosing between coding agents on evidence: compare executor or agent choices on reproducible tasks using quality, cost, time, tool, and evidence metrics.

    3.2k GitHub stars~2.1k tokensUpdated yesterday
    Auto-check passed
  • Omh Agent Instructions

    rlaope/oh-my-hermes

    [omh] Agent instruction file for a repo -- AGENTS.md, CLAUDE.md, a Cursor rule: write or update what an agent cannot derive from the code, inside a marked region, with every command verified or…

    3.2k GitHub stars~2.2k tokensUpdated yesterday
    Auto-check passed
  • Omh Agent Ops Review

    rlaope/oh-my-hermes

    [omh] AI agent progress for managers: help managers inspect AI-agent progress, blockers, quality gates, and throughput levers.

    3.2k GitHub stars~1.9k tokensUpdated yesterday
    Auto-check passed
  • Omh AI Slop Cleaner

    rlaope/oh-my-hermes

    [omh] Messy or AI-generated code to clean up: delete AI-generated slop, dead code, and duplication while observable behavior stays identical.

    3.2k GitHub stars~2.7k tokensUpdated yesterday
    Auto-check passed
  • Omh App Debugging

    rlaope/oh-my-hermes

    [omh] Application code misbehaves -- a wrong value, a flaky test, a lost update: reproduce it first, form competing hypotheses, discriminate them with the cheapest observation, and only then fix the…

    3.2k GitHub stars~2.3k tokensUpdated yesterday
    Auto-check passed

Questions about Ulw Plan

What does Ulw Plan do?

[omh] High-stakes technical proposal needing approval: consensus planning with review gates. Ulw Plan is an agent skill from rlaope/oh-my-hermes. [omh] High-stakes technical proposal needing approval: consensus planning with review gates.

When should I use Ulw Plan?

Ulw Plan fits situations like: the user says: ralplan; acceptance criteria; verification command.

How do I install Ulw Plan in Claude Code?

Run `npx skills add rlaope/oh-my-hermes --skill ulw-plan -a claude-code`. Or copy the skill folder (skills/ulw-plan in rlaope/oh-my-hermes) into .claude/skills/ulw-plan in your project. Claude Code loads it when a task matches its description.

How do I install Ulw Plan in Codex?

Run `npx skills add rlaope/oh-my-hermes --skill ulw-plan -a codex`. Or copy the skill folder (skills/ulw-plan in rlaope/oh-my-hermes) into .agents/skills/ulw-plan in your project. Codex loads it when a task matches its description.

Can I use Ulw Plan in Cursor, Gemini CLI or GitHub Copilot?

Cursor, Gemini CLI, GitHub Copilot and OpenCode also load SKILL.md folders. With the skills CLI, run `npx skills add rlaope/oh-my-hermes --skill ulw-plan -a cursor` (or -a gemini-cli, github-copilot or opencode for the others). To copy it by hand, put the folder in .cursor/skills/ulw-plan, .gemini/skills/ulw-plan, .github/skills/ulw-plan and .opencode/skills/ulw-plan in your project.

What does Ulw Plan need to run?

SKILL.md names no scripts, command-line tools or credentials: Ulw Plan is instructions for the agent only.

Does Ulw Plan access the network?

SKILL.md contains no URLs. Any network use would come from the scripts or tools the agent runs. This is read from the text; nothing was executed.

Is Ulw Plan safe to install?

Our automated static check of SKILL.md found no risky patterns, such as piping downloads into a shell, reading credential files or hidden Unicode. It is not a guarantee. Review the folder before installing.

What licence does Ulw Plan use?

Ulw Plan is published under the MIT licence (the repository's licence). It allows redistribution, so the full SKILL.md is shown on this page.

How many tokens does Ulw Plan use?

About 2.7k tokens (SKILL.md is roughly 11k characters). Agents keep only the skill's name and description in context until a task matches; then they load SKILL.md in full.

What are the alternatives to Ulw Plan?

Skills that share tags, products or a category with Ulw Plan: Spec Generator (catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow, 2.1k stars), Spec Generator (catlog22/Claude-Code-Workflow, 2.1k stars), Project Planner (adrianpuiu/claude-skills-marketplace, 100 stars) and Sdd Work Decomposition (magnus919/hermes-profiles, 282 stars). The comparison table on this page puts their stars, adoption, token cost, safety result and licence side by side.

Who maintains Ulw Plan?

rlaope (a GitHub user) maintains it in rlaope/oh-my-hermes, which has 3,233 GitHub stars. The repository holds 143 skills in this directory. The repository was last updated on October 8, 2026.

Source: rlaope/oh-my-hermes on GitHub. Facts on this page come from the repository at the commit we read; the author's words are quoted as theirs.