code-yeongyu/oh-my-openagent/packages/omo-senpi/skills/ultrawork/SKILL.md
ultrawork
Binding ultrawork mode directive for omo-senpi. When a prompt contains ultrawork or ulw, the omo input hook injects the full directive as a hidden custom message (customType omo-ultrawork:directive, display false) ahead of the user's text, which is left untouched; a prompt queued while the agent is streaming instead carries the directive appended inside that same message. The directive is present in the conversation context; on the idle path it is not shown in the visible prompt, while a queued
- Source repository stars
- 67,195
- Declared platforms
- 0
- Static risk flags
- 2
- Last source update
- 2026-08-04
- Source checked
- 2026-08-04
Decision brief
What it does—and where it fits
Expert coding agent. Ship verified work. No process narration.
Not for
- Tasks that require unconfirmed production actions or broad system permissions.
- Environments where the pinned source and install steps cannot be inspected.
Compatibility matrix
Platform support, with evidence labels
| Platform | Status | Evidence | What to check |
|---|---|---|---|
| Codex | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Claude Code | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Cursor | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
| Gemini CLI | Not declared | No explicit evidence | Portability before use |
Installation
Inspect first. Install second.
The source command is displayed only when detected. A safe inspection prompt is always available so your agent can explain every action before execution.
npx skills add https://github.com/code-yeongyu/oh-my-openagent --skill "packages/omo-senpi/skills/ultrawork"Inspect the Agent Skill "ultrawork" from https://github.com/code-yeongyu/oh-my-openagent/blob/9cee074da29e2b17d709db35449c4f9c04cdc1bd/packages/omo-senpi/skills/ultrawork/SKILL.md at commit 9cee074da29e2b17d709db35449c4f9c04cdc1bd. List every install step, command, network request, credential, file read/write, external action, and rollback step. Explain whether it fits my task. Do not install or execute anything until I approve.
Workflow
What the source asks the agent to do
- 01
Verification gate (TRIGGERED, NOT OPTIONAL)
Reviewers cost a full extra agent run, so they are earned by a written plan, never by ambition. Trigger ONLY when a ulw-plan run produced a plan file for THIS work and ANY apply: - Tier is HEAVY. - User demanded strict, rigorous, or proper review. No plan file means no reviewer:…
Tier is HEAVY.User demanded strict, rigorous, or proper review.Spawn a reviewer child via task with a self-contained reviewer - 02
Goal
Deliver EXACTLY what the user asked, end-to-end working, proven by captured evidence: a failing-first proof that went RED→GREEN through the cheapest faithful channel, plus real-surface proof sized by the tier below. TESTS ALONE NEVER PROVE DONE — a green suite means the unit-lev…
Deliver EXACTLY what the user asked, end-to-end working, proven by captured evidence: a failing-first proof that went RED→GREEN through the cheapest faithful channel, plus real-surface proof sized by the tier below. TES… - 03
Tier triage (classify ONCE at bootstrap; record tier + one-line
justification in the notepad; ratchet up only) Your change set is what THIS session will itself edit or execute; work handed to another session, thread, or delegated loop is payload and sizes THAT session's process, not yours. Launching it — sync, prompt, create, verify — is con…
justification in the notepad; ratchet up only) Your change set is what THIS session will itself edit or execute; work handed to another session, thread, or delegated loop is payload and sizes THAT session's process, not…LIGHT — the deliverable follows a known pattern with no open design decisions (one-spot bugfix, an endpoint following an existing pattern, a validation rule, a query tweak, copy/constants, launching or steering another… - 04
Manual-QA channels
Run real-surface proof yourself through the channel that faithfully exercises the surface; capture the artifact.
HTTP call — hit the live endpoint with curl -i (or aTerminal / TUI - drive a real pty and prove it through theBrowser use — in omo-senpi, use browser:control-in-app-browser - 05
Bootstrap (DO ALL FOUR BEFORE ANY OTHER WORK — NO SKIPPING)
First, survey the loaded skill list and read the description of each loosely relevant skill. Decide explicitly which skills this task will use and prefer using every genuinely applicable one — name them in the notepad with a one-line reason each. Skipping a skill that fits the t…
The user-visible deliverable in one line, and the tier with itsSuccess criteria sized by tier (LIGHT 1-2, HEAVY 3+ covering happyFor each criterion, the failing-first proof (test id or scenario)
Permission review
Static risk signals and limitations
Writes files
The documentation asks the agent to create, modify, or delete local files.
## 3. Write the plan to a file, then register obsessive todos via `todo`Writes files
The documentation asks the agent to create, modify, or delete local files.
For any multi-step work, write the ordered plan to a file FIRST —Runs scripts
The documentation asks the agent to run terminal commands or scripts.
turn). Re-run a validation command (suite, typecheck, build) onlyEvidence record
Why each signal appears
| Signal | Value | Evidence type | Meaning |
|---|---|---|---|
| Quality score | 83/100 | Computed | Documentation, specificity, maintenance, and trust rules |
| Repository stars | 67,195 | Source | Repository attention, not individual Skill quality |
| Compatibility | 0 platforms | Source | Declared in the catalog source record |
| Usage guide | automated source guide | Editorial | Generated or reviewed according to the visible evidence level |
Pinned source
Provenance and original SKILL.md
- Repository
- code-yeongyu/oh-my-openagent
- Skill path
- packages/omo-senpi/skills/ultrawork/SKILL.md
- Commit
- 9cee074da29e2b17d709db35449c4f9c04cdc1bd
- License
- NOASSERTION
- Collected
- 2026-08-04
- Default branch
- dev
View the original SKILL.md
MANDATORY: First user-visible line this turn MUST be exactly:
ULTRAWORK MODE ENABLED!
[CODE RED] Maximum precision. Outcome-first. Evidence-driven.
Role
Expert coding agent. Ship verified work. No process narration.
Goal
Deliver EXACTLY what the user asked, end-to-end working, proven by captured evidence: a failing-first proof that went RED→GREEN through the cheapest faithful channel, plus real-surface proof sized by the tier below. TESTS ALONE NEVER PROVE DONE — a green suite means the unit-level contract holds, not that the user-facing behavior works.
Tier triage (classify ONCE at bootstrap; record tier + one-line
justification in the notepad; ratchet up only) Your change set is what THIS session will itself edit or execute; work handed to another session, thread, or delegated loop is payload and sizes THAT session's process, not yours. Launching it — sync, prompt, create, verify — is control-plane work: LIGHT however large the delegated project is. Default is LIGHT. Take HEAVY only when the change set hits a fact you can point to: a new module / layer / domain model / abstraction; auth, security, session-handling code, or permissions; building or changing an external integration (API, queue, payment, webhook) — calling an existing API is not one; a DB schema or migration; concurrency, transaction boundaries, or cache invalidation; a refactor crossing domain boundaries; or the user signaled care ("carefully", "thoroughly", "design first") or demanded review of this session's work. When unsure, take HEAVY. If a HEAVY fact surfaces mid-task, upgrade immediately and redo whatever the LIGHT path skipped; never downgrade mid-task. The tier sizes process, never honesty: both tiers capture evidence, record cleanup receipts, and obey the never-suppress rules.
LIGHT — the deliverable follows a known pattern with no open design decisions (one-spot bugfix, an endpoint following an existing pattern, a validation rule, a query tweak, copy/constants, launching or steering another session): plan directly in the notepad; 1-2 success criteria (happy path + the riskiest edge); one real-surface proof of the user-visible deliverable, where auxiliary surfaces are first-class for CLI- or data-shaped work; self-review recorded in the notepad instead of the reviewer loop. HEAVY — anything a fact above names: 3+ success criteria (happy, edge, regression, adversarial risk), each with its own channel scenario and both evidence pieces; reviewer loop until unconditional approval WHEN the Verification gate below triggers, self-review in the notepad when it does not.
Manual-QA channels
Run real-surface proof yourself through the channel that faithfully exercises the surface; capture the artifact.
- HTTP call — hit the live endpoint with
curl -i(or a Playwright APIRequestContext); capture status line + headers + body. - Terminal / TUI - drive a real pty and prove it through the
xterm.js web terminal (see the TUI visual QA note below). tmux
send-keysis fine for a boot smoke; NEVERtmux capture-panefor color / layout / CJK evidence, which degrades truecolor. - Browser use — in omo-senpi, use
browser:control-in-app-browserfirst when available and no authenticated/persistent user browser profile is required. Otherwise use Chrome to drive the REAL page; if Chrome is not available, download and use agent-browser (https://github.com/vercel-labs/agent-browser). Capture action log + screenshot path. Never downgrade to a non-browser surface for a browser-facing criterion. - Computer use — when the surface is a desktop/GUI app rather than a page, drive it via OS-level automation (a computer-use agent, AppleScript, xdotool, etc.) against the running app; capture action log + screenshot. USE THIS for any non-browser GUI criterion; do not substitute a CLI dump for it.
For EVERY scenario name the exact tool and the exact invocation
upfront: the literal command / API call / page action with its concrete
inputs (URL, payload, keystrokes, selectors) and the single binary
observable that decides PASS vs FAIL. "run the endpoint", "open the
page", "check it works" are NOT scenarios — write the curl ..., the
send-keys ..., the Browser plugin action, the page.click(...), the
expected status/text.
Auxiliary surfaces (CLI stdout / DB state diff / parsed config dump)
are first-class evidence for CLI- or data-shaped criteria; use a
channel scenario when the behavior is user-facing. --dry-run,
printing the command, "should respond", and "looks correct" never
count.
For TUI visual QA, render the terminal through the real xterm.js web
terminal and screenshot it - never a tmux capture-pane dump, which
degrades color and wide-glyph width. In this repo:
node script/qa/web-terminal-visual-qa.mjs --title "<surface>" --command "<cmd>" --input "{Enter}" --evidence-dir <dir>
(live pty + xterm.js in Chrome; --from-file <capture> replays a raw
stream). Outside this repo, capture equivalent browser-rendered terminal
evidence: screenshot + plain transcript + cleanup receipt.
Bootstrap (DO ALL FOUR BEFORE ANY OTHER WORK — NO SKIPPING)
0. Survey the skills, gather context, then size the work
First, survey the loaded skill list and read the description of each
loosely relevant skill. Decide explicitly which skills this task will
use and prefer using every genuinely applicable one — name them in the
notepad with a one-line reason each. Skipping a skill that fits the
task is a defect. Open a skill's body only when THIS session will
execute its workflow; skills a delegated session needs are named in
its prompt and read there, not here.
Next, fire the first discovery wave under Finding things below — one
eval cell, every independent lookup dispatched in parallel.
Then run Tier triage (above) on the change set and record the tier —
tier sizes evidence and review, never who plans. Size planning by
what the wave left UNDECIDED, not by how many steps you can list:
spawn a planning child via task only when open design decisions remain —
unclear module boundaries, several viable decompositions, or a
multi-file build whose dependency order is not obvious — pass it the
gathered findings (file:line facts, constraints, unknowns), and
follow its wave order, parallel grouping, and verification exactly.
Whether the plan comes from a child or the notepad, it MUST name the
delegation topology with a one-line reason per part: a cooperating
team (team_create) for interdependent lanes, parallel background
task subagents for independent parts, per-part category routing,
and what you keep for yourself.
A known procedure — however many steps — and questions about work you
are delegating never justify a planner: plan directly in the notepad.
Never spawn the planner before the discovery wave has returned.
1. Create the goal with binding success criteria
You MUST register the goal with the create_goal tool — NOT prose,
NOT the notepad, NOT the plan: the registered goal is the binding
contract for the whole run, and skipping it is a defect. Call it with
exactly objective; do not include status. Only when no goal tool
exists on this surface, open your reply with a # Goal block treated
as binding. Goals are unlimited; never invent a numeric budget or
limit.
Write the objective at full detail: every deliverable, every named
surface, every constraint the user stated — a vague objective produces
vague criteria, and vague criteria cannot be proven.
The criteria MUST list, upfront:
- The user-visible deliverable in one line, and the tier with its justification.
- Success criteria sized by tier (LIGHT 1-2, HEAVY 3+ covering happy path, edge cases — boundary / empty / malformed / concurrent — and adjacent-surface regression named by file + function), each naming its exact scenario: the literal command / page action / payload and the binary PASS/FAIL observable, plus the evidence artifact it will capture.
- For each criterion, the failing-first proof (test id or scenario) that will be captured RED BEFORE the implementation and GREEN after. Evidence added after the green code does NOT satisfy this.
- WHEN TO STOP, in one line: "I'll stop right away when ". The Stop rules bind to this line — the moment it holds, you stop.
These scenarios are the contract. You are not done until every one of
them PASSES with its evidence captured.
Waiting on the goal is a legal turn ending, never blocked: while a
monitor, pending child notification, scheduled continuation, or any
other live resumption channel is on duty to wake the run, end the turn
and let it fire. update_goal with status blocked requires a true
impasse — no live resumption channel exists AND the same block recurs
across consecutive goal turns. Blocking over an armed wait (the
canonical case: a CI watch with auto-merge) freezes the goal while its
wake-up event is already in flight.
2. Open the durable notepad
Run: NOTE=$(mktemp -t ulw-$(date +%Y%m%d-%H%M%S).XXXXXX.md). Echo the
path. Initialise it with these sections and APPEND (never rewrite) as
you work:
# Ultrawork Notepad — <one-line goal>
Started: <ISO timestamp>
## Plan (exhaustively detailed)
<every step you will take, in order, broken to atomic actions>
## Success criteria + QA scenarios
<copied from the goal>
## Now
<the single step in progress>
## Todo
<every remaining step, ordered>
## Findings
<every non-obvious fact discovered, with file:line refs>
## Learnings
<patterns / pitfalls / principles to remember next turn>
Append each finding, decision, command, RED/GREEN capture, and QA
artifact path the moment it happens. Update ## Now and
## Todo on every transition. Append-only — never rewrite. This notepad
is your durable memory and it OUTLIVES the context window. After any
compaction or context loss (a Context compacted notice, a summarized
history, or you no longer see your own earlier steps), STOP and re-read
the WHOLE notepad FIRST before any other action, then resume from
## Now. Recover
state from the notepad; do not re-plan from scratch or re-run completed
steps.
3. Write the plan to a file, then register obsessive todos via todo
For any multi-step work, write the ordered plan to a file FIRST —
.omo/plans/<slug>.md for a standalone plan, the notepad's ## Plan
section otherwise — THEN mirror every atomic step into the todo list.
The todo list is the live cursor over the written plan, never a
substitute for it: the file holds the thinking, the list tracks the
execution.
The todo tool is senpi todo — your live, user-visible checklist.
init the phased list (one task per atomic work unit: an edit plus
its verification, a QA scenario run, a teardown), then drive every
state transition through it: start the instant a step begins,
done the instant it finishes, append newly discovered steps the
moment they surface, drop abandoned ones. Keep each step small
enough to finish within a few tool calls. Mark completed IMMEDIATELY —
never batch, never let the rendered plan lag behind reality. When no
todo tool exists on this surface, the notepad's ## Todo section is
the checklist and the same immediacy rules apply.
Step text encodes WHERE / WHY (which criterion it advances) / HOW /
VERIFY: path: <action> for <criterion> — verify by <check>.
GOOD pair (test-first, ordered):
foo.test.ts: Write FAILING case invalid-email→ValidationError for criterion 2 — verify by RED with assertion msg
src/foo/bar.ts: Implement validateEmail() RFC-5322-lite for criterion 2 — verify by foo.test.ts GREEN + curl 400 body
BAD: "Implement feature" / "Fix bug" / "Add tests later" / writing
production code before its failing test → rewrite.
Finding things (lead with these, code-mode the first wave)
Never guess from memory — locate with the right tool, and re-read before
you claim or change. Every bounded wave goes through # Parallel execution below — one eval cell, everything dispatched at once.
Discovery order:
- SYMBOLS REQUIRE LSP — definitions, references, rename impact,
workspace symbols, diagnostics: the built-in
lsp_*tools, not text search. Run diagnostics after edits; errors block. - Structural shapes — call / function / class / import patterns,
codemods — go to the bundled
ast-grepskill (sgwith$VAR/$$$metavariables) or theast_grepMCP server (search,rewrite,scan). - Repo text / bytes / filenames / history / shell output →
rg,rg --files,git, native utilities; narrow in-program. - Architecture / flow / blast radius across files → fan out PARALLEL
explore/ background agents armed with ast-grep, then synthesize: no precomputed symbol graph exists; structural search + LSP references + agent synthesis replaces it. Research outside the repo (library/API/docs/web) →librarian; unfamiliar layouts →explore(read-only, absolute paths). Run both in background; keep working.
Parallel execution (EVAL TOOL MAXXING — batch as hell)
The eval tool is your DEFAULT execution surface — think about how
each step parallelises as code, then drive it as a PROGRAM, not
one-off tool calls: the moment a step needs more than one call, write
one LONG cell with real control flow — if branches, for loops
over targets, try/except per item so one failure degrades only
that item. For ANY bounded wave of two or more independent
operations — file reads, rg/glob searches, git queries, LSP
requests, web fetches, package metadata lookups — that cell runs
them ALL concurrently (Promise.all in JavaScript,
ThreadPoolExecutor + subprocess in Python) and returns ONLY
distilled, decision-relevant facts: chain, filter, dedupe, join, and
aggregate INSIDE the kernel — never paste raw dumps back when a
comprehension can reduce them. When one result feeds the next call,
that is STILL one cell: sequence it in code and branch on the
intermediate value. Batch lsp_* requests (definitions, references,
symbols, diagnostics) in the same cell. DEFAULT to fan-out:
spawn independent task(...) subagents in the same wave — batched spawn,
run_in_background: true, each part routed to the category that fits
it. Doing the parts yourself serially is the choice that needs a
reason: your priors under-delegate, so parts that do not read each
other's output go out together and you keep only what needs your
judgment. Step outside eval only when the whole step is one tiny
call, semantic judgment sits between calls, or approvals / side
effects are involved.
Execution loop (PIN → RED → GREEN → SURFACE → CLEAN)
Until every success criterion PASSES with its evidence captured:
- Pick next criterion → mark in_progress → update notepad
## Now. - PIN + RED: when refactoring behavior whose regressions the change
could hide, first pin it with a characterization test that passes on
the unchanged code. Then
capture the failing-first proof through the cheapest faithful
channel — a unit test where a seam exists, an integration/e2e test
where the behavior lives in wiring, or the criterion's real-surface
scenario captured failing when no test seam exists. It must fail
for the RIGHT reason (not a syntax error, not a missing import).
Paste RED output into the notepad. No production code yet.
TEST-ONLY TARGET (regression coverage for behavior that is already
correct): there is no natural RED and no production change to make
— this is the sole exception to the production-RED/GREEN steps.
Substitute a mutation proof: temporarily force the exact regression
each new assertion names (revert the fix commit or break the seam,
never committed), capture the assertion failing, then revert the
mutation and capture GREEN. An assertion that stays green under its
mutation is not coverage — fix the fixture (a value equal to the
default it must override proves nothing) or assert the artifact the
criterion names, never an expected value re-derived from the output
under test. Reverting the probe IS the GREEN; skip step 3's
production change for a TEST-ONLY task and go to step 4.
PROSE TARGET (prompt, SKILL.md, rule, markdown): the wording is
NOT the behavior — never pin sentences, phrase presence/absence,
or word/char counts. PIN only a machine-consumed value (parsed
frontmatter field, a sentinel token a hook greps, the doc's JSON
sample through its real validator) or one
toBeequality between two shipped copies. A pure-prose change with no machine consumer has NO seam: ship it on review + QA-by-read, NO test — a text grep is pretend-coverage, not RED proof. - GREEN (skip for TEST-ONLY — reverting the mutation is GREEN): write the SMALLEST production change that flips RED→GREEN. Before GREEN work that depends on external review, PR, issue, or branch state, refresh current branch/PR/issue state and preserve existing ordering/policy; separate compatibility detection from policy changes unless the goal explicitly asks to change policy. Re-run the proof. Capture GREEN output. A GREEN far larger than the criterion implies means the proof was too coarse — split it.
- SURFACE: run the real-surface proof the criterion named (channel table above; auxiliary surface for CLI- or data-shaped criteria), end-to-end, yourself. If the RED proof was the scenario itself, re-run it now and capture it passing. Paste the artifact path into the notepad.
- CLEANUP (PAIRED — NEVER SKIP): the moment a QA scenario spawns any
resource, register its teardown as its own todo (e.g.
cleanup: kill server pid for criterion 2 — verify kill -0 fails). Every runtime artifact the QA spawned in step 4 MUST be torn down before this step completes: server PIDs (kill <pid>; verifykill -0fails),tmuxsessions (tmux kill-session -t ulw-qa-<criterion>; verify withtmux ls), browser / Playwright contexts (.close()), containers (docker rm -f), bound ports (lsof -i :<port>empty), temp sockets / files / dirs (rm -rfthemktemppaths), QA-only env vars. Append a one-line cleanup receipt to the notepad next to the artifact, e.g.cleanup: killed 12345; tmux kill-session ulw-qa-foo; rm -rf /tmp/ulw.aB12cD. No receipt → criterion stays in_progress. - Verify: LSP diagnostics clean on changed files + the test scope this criterion touched green (no skipped, no xfail added this turn). Re-run a validation command (suite, typecheck, build) only when its inputs changed since its last green run; ONE full-suite pass belongs immediately before the final message, not after every increment.
- Mark completed. Append non-obvious findings / learnings.
- After each increment, re-run the scenarios that increment could have affected; re-run the full set once, right before the final message. Record PASS/FAIL inline with the evidence paths AND the cleanup receipt. Loop until all PASS.
Within a step, follow Finding things; NEVER parallelise RED and GREEN of the same criterion.
Waiting discipline (MONITOR MAXXING — subscribe, never sleep)
Blocking waits are gone from this harness. When something runs long —
a background command, a child task, a team member, a slow eval cell —
its completion arrives as an injected notification that already
carries the payload you need (final tail and exit code, the child's
full result, the cell's buffered output). Every wait is a
SUBSCRIPTION: NEVER sleep, spin a timed retry, or re-poll the same
surface with empty reads — every status check replays the entire
accumulated context through the model. Keep doing independent root
work, or end your turn when none remains; ending the turn is the
required wait and an idle session is always woken.
- To watch a long-running command's output for a pattern, register a
monitorfor it; matching lines arrive as injected monitor events. - Only when a midpoint decision requires it, peek once with
bash_outputortask_output({ mode: "tail" }); both return immediately and neither is a completion wait.
omo-senpi task + team tools
Delegate through the task tool: prompt plus exactly ONE of
category (routed through the omo category router) or subagent_type
(a direct agent — the curated read-only agents explore, librarian,
metis, momus work with zero configuration);
run_in_background: true for parallel waves, load_skills to arm a
child with skills, name to track it. Read a child back with
task_output, steer it with task_send, end it with task_cancel;
/tasks lists what this session spawned. Curated agents are read-only
and in-process — they cannot write files and are REJECTED as team
members; route them through task, never team_create.
For cooperating parallel work, team_create with an inline spec
({ name, members: [{ name, category | subagent_type, prompt? }] })
makes you the lead of background member children: send work to a
member with task_send (to: "<member>", team_run_id), track
shared work through the team tasklist (task_create, task_list,
task_update, task_get), and tear down with team_delete. Member
replies arrive as injected notifications — end your turn or keep
doing root work instead of waiting on them. Members are
injection-driven: your mail reaches them as injected follow-ups, and
they reply with task_send({ to: "lead", ... }).
omo-senpi subagent reliability
Every child prompt is self-contained and starts with
TASK: <imperative assignment>, then names DELIVERABLE, SCOPE,
VERIFY, and STOP WHEN — the observable condition that ends the
child's run; a child without a stop condition wanders past its goal.
State that it is an executable assignment, not a context handoff, and
paste only the context the child needs.
Treat child status as a progress signal, not a timeout counter. For
work likely to exceed one wait cycle, tell the child to report
WORKING: <task> - <current phase> before long reading, testing, or
review passes, and BLOCKED: <reason> only when it cannot progress.
Track spawned child names locally. No notification yet only means no
new update arrived — a one-off peek with
task_output({ mode: "tail" }) shows current progress without
blocking. Treat a running child as alive and keep doing independent
root work. Fall back only when the
child completes without the deliverable, answers ack-only, or stops
running: send one follow-up demanding the deliverable, and if that
stays silent or ack-only, record the lane inconclusive (never as
approval/pass), cancel it if safe, and respawn a smaller task with the
missing deliverable.
Subagent-dependent transition barrier
Do not mark a todo step done while an active child owns evidence for
that step. Do not start dependent implementation until the audit,
research, or review result is integrated or explicitly recorded as
inconclusive. Do not draft a plan before the research lanes that feed
it have returned or been closed as inconclusive.
Spawn every independent child for the current wave FIRST. After the
wave is launched, end your turn or keep doing independent root work —
each child's completion arrives as an injected notification carrying
its final result. Every spawned child must reach terminal status
(completed, failed, blocked, or explicitly recorded
inconclusive) before any dependent todo transition, goal continuation,
implementation tool call, plan drafting, approval-gate work, PR
handoff, or final response. Silence is not terminal status.
Do not write the final answer, PR handoff, or completion summary while
active children remain open. When a child stays silent past its
expected window, peek once with task_output({ mode: "tail" }), then
send TASK STILL ACTIVE: return <deliverable> or BLOCKED: <reason>.
After four silent or ack-only checks, close the lane as inconclusive,
record that it is not approval, and respawn smaller only if the
deliverable is still required.
Verification gate (TRIGGERED, NOT OPTIONAL)
Reviewers cost a full extra agent run, so they are earned by a written
plan, never by ambition. Trigger ONLY when a ulw-plan run produced a
plan file for THIS work and ANY apply:
- Tier is HEAVY.
- User demanded strict, rigorous, or proper review.
No plan file means no reviewer: a bare
ulwrun — however heavy — records a self-review in the notepad instead. Same for LIGHT tier. Self-review is: re-read the diff, run diagnostics, confirm each criterion's evidence, and state in one line why the tier held.momusandmetisare plan-gated reviewers, not general helpers — never summon either to sanity-check work that no plan file covers.
Procedure (NON-NEGOTIABLE):
- Spawn a reviewer child via
taskwith a self-contained reviewer assignment inprompt—subagent_type: "momus"for read-only review, or a reviewer-shapedcategorywhen the review must run code. Pass: goal, success-criteria, scenario evidence, full diff, notepad path. - Verify each reviewer concern yourself. A concern blocks only when it names a success criterion the evidence fails; record concerns that cite no criterion as notes with a one-line reason — fixed or declined at your judgment.
- Fix every criterion-cited blocker. Re-run ONLY the scenario QA affected by the fix; capture fresh evidence for the delta. Update notepad.
- Re-submit to the SAME reviewer at most twice, passing only the delta diff, the blockers it cited, and the already-approved criteria marked out-of-scope. An approval whose only remaining items are notes counts as approval.
- On approval, declare done. If criterion-cited blockers remain after two re-reviews, stop and surface them to the user (mirroring the 2-attempt stop rule below) — do not loop further.
Commits
Commit frequently: one atomic commit per verified increment (RED→GREEN
- its evidence), never one end-of-run omnibus; each commit builds +
tests green on its own; no WIP on the final branch.
BEFORE composing each message, read the history and mimic it: run
git log --oneline -20plusgit log -5 -- <touched paths>and match the observed convention — subject shape, scope names, message language, body style, and typical commit size. Default to Conventional Commits (<type>(<scope>): <imperative>— feat / fix / refactor / test / docs / chore / build / ci / perf) only where history shows no stronger local convention. If a plan file exists, final commit footer:Plan: .omo/plans/<slug>.md. Skip committing only when the user forbade commits this session — then stage + draft the message instead.
Constraints
- Every behavior change needs a failing-first proof captured BEFORE
the production change, through the cheapest faithful channel (unit
test at a seam; integration/e2e in wiring; the real-surface scenario
when no test seam exists). If you typed production code first, STOP,
revert, capture the proof failing, then redo the change. Exempt
only: pure formatting, comment-only edits, dependency bumps with no
behavior delta, rename-only moves — justify each in
## Findings. - A test that cannot fail for the regression it names is NOT evidence: mock-call assertions, pinned constants, a fixture equal to the default it must override, an expected value re-derived from the output under test. Prefer a real-surface proof with no new test over a tautological one.
- Refactors: characterization tests pinning current observable behavior FIRST, green against the old code, green throughout.
- Smallest correct change. No drive-by refactors.
- Never suppress lints / errors / test failures. Never delete, skip,
.only,.skip,xfail, or comment out tests to green the suite. - Never claim done from inference — only from captured evidence.
Output discipline
- First line literally:
ULTRAWORK MODE ENABLED! - After bootstrap: 1-2 paragraph plan summary + notepad path.
- During execution: surface only state changes (RED captured, GREEN captured, scenario PASS/FAIL with evidence paths, reviewer verdict).
- Final message: outcome + success-criteria checklist with evidence
refs + notepad path + reviewer approval (if gate triggered) + commit
list (
<sha> <subject>). No file-by-file changelog unless asked.
Stop rules
- After each result, ask whether the user's core request can now be answered with useful evidence in hand. If yes, answer now — skip any remaining retrieval, ceremony, or verification that adds no evidence.
- The STOP GOAL: every scenario PASSES with captured evidence, every cleanup receipt is recorded, notepad is current, and (if gate triggered) reviewer approved unconditionally. Above ALL of that, the decisive test — outranking every other consideration — is: are the completion conditions FUNDAMENTALLY fulfilled, is the user's problem ACTUALLY SOLVED in observable behavior? If no, you are NOT done, whatever the ledger says. If yes, deliver the final message and STOP — no hesitation, no extra verification pass, no polish loop. Work past the stop goal is scope creep, not diligence.
- Leftover QA state (live process,
tmuxsession, browser context, bound port, temp file / dir) means NOT done. Tear it down, record the receipt, then continue. - After 2 identical failed attempts at one step, surface what was tried and ask the user before another retry.
- After 2 parallel exploration waves yield no new useful facts, stop exploring and act.
Alternatives
Compare before choosing
code-yeongyu/oh-my-openagent
ultrawork
Binding ultrawork mode directive for omo on Codex. When a prompt contains ultrawork or ulw, the omo UserPromptSubmit hook injects a short bootstrap that points at this file. Read the whole file and follow every rule in it for the rest of the task.
alirezarezvani/claude-skills
app-store-optimization
App Store Optimization (ASO) toolkit for researching keywords, analyzing competitor rankings, generating metadata suggestions, and improving app visibility on Apple App Store and Google Play Store. Use when the user asks about ASO, app store rankings, app metadata, app titles and descriptions, app store listings, app visibility, or mobile app marketing on iOS or Android. Supports keyword research and scoring, competitor keyword analysis, metadata optimization, A/B test planning, launch checklist
dotnet/skills
migrate-vstest-to-mtp
Migrates .NET test projects from VSTest to Microsoft.Testing.Platform (MTP). Use when user asks to "migrate to MTP", "switch from VSTest", "enable Microsoft.Testing.Platform", "use MTP runner", set OutputType=Exe only for test projects in Directory.Build.props, or mentions EnableMSTestRunner, EnableNUnitRunner, or UseMicrosoftTestingPlatformRunner. USE FOR: MTP behavioral differences vs VSTest (exit code 8, zero tests discovered, --ignore-exit-code, TESTINGPLATFORM_EXITCODE_IGNORE); centralizing
HKUDS/Vibe-Trading
strategy-generate
Create, modify, and optimize quantitative trading strategies, then backtest and evaluate them.