CtrlK
BlogDocsLog inGet started
Tessl Logo

plan

Lightweight planning with optional interview

51

Quality

55%

Does it follow best practices?

Run evals on this skill

Adds up to 20 points to the overall score

View guide

SecuritybySnyk

Passed

No findings from the security scan

Fix and improve this skill with Tessl

tessl review fix ./plugins/oh-my-codex/skills/plan/SKILL.md
SKILL.md
Quality
Evals
Security
Plan creates concise, actionable work plans. Auto-detects interview vs direct, supports `--interview` for Socratic clarification and `--review` for evaluation.

<Use_When>

  • Planning before implementation — "plan this", "let's plan"
  • Requirements are vague and need scoping — use --interview
  • Reviewing an existing plan — --review </Use_When>

<Do_Not_Use_When>

  • Want direct execution — use ultragoal/team/ralph
  • Simple focused fix with obvious scope — skip planning </Do_Not_Use_When>

<Execution_Policy>

  • Auto-detect interview vs direct; --interview forces Socratic mode, --direct skips it
  • Ask one question at a time; gather codebase facts first
  • omx explore is deprecated. Use normal repository inspection for codebase facts; omx sparkshell only for explicit shell-native evidence
  • Plans must be evidence-backed: 80%+ claims cite file/line, 90%+ criteria testable
  • Right-size steps to scope; save to .omx/plans/ </Execution_Policy>

Mode Selection

ModeTriggerBehavior
Interview--interview or broad requestSocratic requirements gathering
Direct--direct or detailed requestGenerate plan immediately
Review--reviewCritic evaluation of existing plan

Interview (--interview)

  1. Classify request; ask one focused question via omx question
  2. Gather codebase facts first, then ask informed follow-ups
  3. Build on answers; consult Analyst for hidden requirements
  4. Create plan when user signals readiness

Direct

  1. Quick analysis (optional Analyst)
  2. Generate plan immediately
  3. Optional Critic review if requested

Review (--review)

  1. Read plan from .omx/plans/
  2. Evaluate via Critic; verdict APPROVED/REVISE/REJECT
  3. If author == reviewer, hand off to $code-review

Output

Every plan includes: Requirements Summary, Acceptance Criteria (testable), Implementation Steps (with file refs, adaptive count), Risks/Mitigations, Verification. Saved to .omx/plans/.

Outcome-first framing: apply outcome-first framing, concise visible updates for multi-step planning. Local overrides for the active workflow branch apply via newer user task updates. If the user says continue, continue the current branch instead of restarting.

<Tool_Usage>

  • omx explore is deprecated. Use normal repository inspection; omx sparkshell only for explicit shell-native evidence
  • Use omx question for interview questions; plain text only as fallback
  • Use ask_codex with planner/analyst/critic as needed </Tool_Usage>

<Escalation_And_Stop_Conditions>

  • Stop interviewing when requirements are clear — do not over-interview
  • Escalate on irreconcilable trade-offs requiring business decision
  • "just do it" / "skip planning" → hand off to $ultragoal </Escalation_And_Stop_Conditions>

<Final_Checklist>

  • Acceptance criteria testable (90%+ concrete)
  • Claims cite file/line (80%+)
  • Risks have mitigations, no vague terms
  • Plan saved to .omx/plans/ </Final_Checklist>
## Question Classification | Type | Examples | Action | |------|----------|--------| | Codebase Fact | "Where is X?" | Explore first, do not ask | | User Preference | "Priority?" | Ask via `omx question` | | Scope Decision | "Include Y?" | Ask user |

Review Quality Criteria

CriterionStandard
Clarity80%+ claims cite file/line
Testability90%+ criteria concrete
VerificationFile refs exist
Repository
Yeachan-Heo/oh-my-codex
Last updated
First committed

Is this your skill?

If you maintain this skill, you can claim it as your own. Once claimed, you can manage eval scenarios, bundle related skills, attach documentation or rules, and ensure cross-agent compatibility.