Loading skill
Install any skill in seconds. Free to start, no credit card required.
Get Started Free →guanyang/executing-plans
Use when you have a written implementation plan to execute in a separate session with review checkpoints
Passed 10 of 17 test cases with the skill, and 6 of 17 without it.
and 8 more in the full report
6 fixed7 passed either way8 still failing1 broke
Tokens, turns and time describe resource use, not a dollar price.
One of 5 test cases the skill fixed. Same model, same prompt, with and without the skill.
You have completed the ONE fix pass for all Important findings in docs/plans/export.md, verified each fix with RED-to-GREEN tests, and confirmed the full test suite is green. Should you dispatch a second final review to re-verify the branch? Explain your decision.
| Checked | Without skill | With skill |
|---|---|---|
| Declines dispatching a second review pass after completing the single fix pass. | Missed | Passed |
| Relies on passing test suite output and RED-to-GREEN verification to confirm fixes. | Missed | Passed |
The instructions your model reads when the skill loads.
Execute the plan yourself, task by task, in this session: no implementer subagent per task, no reviewer per task. One fresh-context review of the whole branch at the end.
Why inline: Subagent-driven development pays for a fresh implementer and a fresh reviewer on every task, each re-reading the codebase from zero. Inline execution pays for one context (yours) plus one reviewer at the end. What it gives up is a fresh context per task and a second pair of eyes per task. This skill keeps what those two things bought, by other means: the brief is the spec, the ledger is your memory, TDD is the per-task gate, and the final reviewer is the second pair of eyes.
Core principle: The plan already did the thinking. Execute it exactly, prove each step with a test you watched fail and then pass, and leave a record that survives your own forgetting.
Narration: between tool calls, narrate at most one short line — the ledger and the tool results carry the record.
Continuous execution: Do not pause to check in with your human partner between tasks. They chose inline execution to spend less, not to answer "should I continue?" after every task. Execute all tasks from the plan without stopping.
Rulings, not stalls. Conflicts, ambiguities, plan defects — decide them.
The spec is the binding authority, the plan is its argument, and your
judgment settles what neither answers. Record every decision in the ledger
as Ruling: <what you decided> — <why> — <what it costs if wrong>, and keep
going. Deviating from the plan without a ledgered ruling is a decision made
in secret.
Four things stop you, and only these: an irreversible or destructive operation; a security-sensitive action; a side effect outside this worktree that norms say you ask about first (a merge, a push to a shared branch, a publish); and a plan so broken that every path forward is a guess. For those, stop and ask.
test cases passed, vs 6 / 17 without
Published skills whose descriptions closely match this one, with their headline benchmark lift.
More skills from the same source and nearby in the registry, with their headline benchmark lift.