Skip to content
cccskills
FreePublished on GitHub

ultrawork

[OMX] Parallel execution engine for high-throughput task completion

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

wmasfoe/md-editor40 stars(GitHub 40 + cccskills 0)

Run score Not tested

See how to install

Files included (1)

  • SKILL.md9.5 KB

SKILL.md (original)

Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.

<Purpose> Ultrawork is a parallel execution engine for high-throughput task completion. It is a component, not a standalone persistence mode: it provides parallelism, context discipline, and smart delegation guidance, but not Ralph's persistence loop, architect sign-off, or long-running completion guarantees. </Purpose>

<Use_When>

  • Multiple independent tasks can run simultaneously
  • User says "ulw", "ultrawork", or explicitly wants parallel execution
  • Task benefits from concurrent execution plus lightweight evidence before wrap-up
  • You need a direct-tool lane plus optional background evidence lanes without entering Ralph </Use_When>

<Do_Not_Use_When>

  • Task requires guaranteed completion with persistence, architect verification, or deslop/reverification -- use ralph instead (Ralph includes ultrawork)
  • Task requires a full autonomous pipeline -- use autopilot instead (autopilot defaults to Ultragoal, with Team/parallel execution used only when needed)
  • There is only one sequential task with no parallelism opportunity -- execute directly or delegate to a single executor
  • The request is still in plan-consensus mode -- keep planning artifacts in ralplan until execution is explicitly authorized
  • User needs session persistence for resume -- use ralph, which adds persistence on top of ultrawork </Do_Not_Use_When>

<Why_This_Exists> Sequential task execution wastes time when tasks are independent. Ultrawork keeps the execution branch fast while tightening the protocol: gather enough context first, define pass/fail acceptance criteria before editing, decide deliberately between local execution and delegation, and finish with evidence rather than vibes. </Why_This_Exists>

<Execution_Policy>

  • Gather enough context before implementation. Start with the task intent, desired outcome, constraints, likely touchpoints, and any uncertainty that would change the execution path.
  • If uncertainty is still material after a quick repo read, do a focused evidence pass first instead of immediately editing.
  • Define pass/fail acceptance criteria before launching execution lanes. Include the command, artifact, or manual check that will prove success.
  • Prefer direct tool work when the task is small, coupled, or blocked on immediate local context. Delegate only when the work is independent enough to benefit from parallel execution.
  • When useful, run a direct-tool lane and one or more background evidence lanes at the same time. Evidence lanes can cover docs, tests, regression mapping, or bounded repo analysis.
  • Fire independent agent calls simultaneously -- never serialize independent work.
  • Always pass the model parameter explicitly when delegating.
  • Read docs/shared/agent-tiers.md before first delegation for agent selection guidance.
  • Auto-delegate researcher when official docs, version-aware framework guidance, best practices, or external dependency behavior materially affect task correctness; treat it as an evidence lane, not a replacement primary workflow.
  • Use run_in_background: true for operations over ~30 seconds (installs, builds, tests).
  • Run quick commands (git status, file reads, simple checks) in the foreground.
  • Apply the shared workflow guidance pattern: outcome-first framing, concise visible updates for speculative/blocked lanes, local overrides for the active workflow branch, evidence-backed validation, explicit stop rules, and continuation of clear safe execution branches instead of restarting or re-asking.
  • If the user says continue, continue the active workflow branch rather than restarting discovery or re-asking settled questions. </Execution_Policy>
<Steps> 1. **Read agent reference**: Load `docs/shared/agent-tiers.md` for tier selection. 2. **Context + certainty check**: - State the task intent in one sentence. - List the constraints and unknowns that could invalidate a quick fix. - If confidence is low, explore first and narrow the task before editing. 3. **Define acceptance criteria before execution**: - What must be true at the end? - Which command or artifact proves it? - Which manual QA check is required, if any? 4. **Classify the work by dependency shape**: - Independent tasks -> parallel lanes. - Shared-file or prerequisite-heavy tasks -> local execution or staged lanes. 5. **Choose self vs delegate deliberately**: - Work locally when the next step depends on immediate repo context, shared files, or tight iteration. - Delegate when the task slice is bounded, independent, and materially improves throughput. 6. **Run execution lanes**: - Direct-tool lane for immediate implementation or verification work. - Background evidence lanes for tests, docs, repo analysis, or regression checks. 7. **Run dependent tasks sequentially**: Wait for prerequisites before launching dependent work. 8. **Close with lightweight evidence**: - Build/typecheck passes when relevant. - Affected tests pass. - Manual QA notes are recorded when the task needs a human-visible or behavior-level check. - No new errors introduced. </Steps>

<Tool_Usage>

  • Use LOW-tier delegation for simple lookups and bounded evidence gathering.
  • Use STANDARD-tier delegation for standard implementation and regression work.
  • Use THOROUGH-tier delegation for complex analysis, architectural review, or risky multi-file changes.
  • Prefer a direct-tool lane when the immediate next step is blocked on local context.
  • Prefer background evidence lanes when you can learn something useful in parallel with implementation.
  • Use run_in_background: true for package installs, builds, and test suites.
  • Use foreground execution for quick status checks and file operations. </Tool_Usage>

State Management

Use the CLI-first state surface (omx state ... --json) for ultrawork lifecycle state. If explicit MCP compatibility tools are already available, equivalent omx_state calls are optional compatibility, not the default.

  • On start: omx state write --input '{"mode":"ultrawork","active":true,"reinforcement_count":1,"started_at":"<now>"}' --json
  • On each reinforcement/loop step: omx state write --input '{"mode":"ultrawork","reinforcement_count":<current>}' --json
  • On completion: omx state write --input '{"mode":"ultrawork","active":false}' --json
  • On cancellation/cleanup: run $cancel (which should call omx state clear --input '{"mode":"ultrawork"}' --json)
<Examples> <Good> Two-track execution with acceptance criteria up front: ``` Acceptance criteria: - `npm run build` passes - `node --test dist/scripts/__tests__/codex-native-hook.test.js` passes - Manual QA: verify `$ultrawork` activation message still points to the session state file

Direct-tool lane:

  • update skills/ultrawork/SKILL.md

Background evidence lane:

  • use /prompts:test-engineer for this scoped task
Why good: Context is grounded first, acceptance criteria are explicit, and the direct-tool lane runs alongside a bounded evidence lane.
</Good>

<Good>
Correct use of self-vs-delegate judgment:

Shared-file edit in progress across src/scripts/codex-native-hook.ts and its test -> keep implementation local. Independent regression mapping for keyword-detector coverage -> delegate to a test-engineer lane.

Why good: Shared-file work stays local; independent evidence work fans out.
</Good>

<Bad>
Parallelizing before the task is grounded:

use /prompts:executor for this scoped task use /prompts:test-engineer for this scoped task

Why bad: No context snapshot, no pass/fail target, and delegation starts before the work is shaped.
</Bad>

<Bad>
Claiming success without evidence or manual QA:

Made the changes. Ultrawork should be updated now.

Why bad: No verification output, no acceptance evidence, and no manual QA note when the behavior is user-visible.
</Bad>
</Examples>

<Escalation_And_Stop_Conditions>
- When ultrawork is invoked directly (not via Ralph), apply lightweight verification only -- build/typecheck passes when relevant, affected tests pass, and manual QA notes are captured when needed.
- Ralph owns persistence, architect verification, deslop, and the full verified-completion promise. Do not claim those guarantees from direct ultrawork alone.
- If a task fails repeatedly across retries, report the issue rather than retrying indefinitely.
- Escalate to the user when tasks have unclear dependencies, conflicting requirements, or a materially branching acceptance target.
</Escalation_And_Stop_Conditions>

<Final_Checklist>
- [ ] Task intent and constraints were grounded before editing
- [ ] Pass/fail acceptance criteria were stated before execution
- [ ] Parallel lanes were used only for independent work
- [ ] Build/typecheck passes when relevant
- [ ] Affected tests pass
- [ ] Manual QA notes recorded when behavior is user-visible
- [ ] No new errors introduced
- [ ] Completion claim stays inside ultrawork's lightweight-verification boundary
</Final_Checklist>

<Advanced>
## Relationship to Other Modes

ralph (persistence + verified completion wrapper) -- includes: ultrawork (this skill) -- provides: high-throughput execution + lightweight evidence

autopilot (autonomous execution) -- includes: ralph -- includes: ultrawork (this skill)

ecomode (token efficiency) -- modifies: ultrawork's model selection


Ultrawork is the parallelism and execution-discipline layer. Ralph adds persistence, architect verification, deslop, and retry-until-done behavior. Autopilot adds the broader autonomous lifecycle pipeline. Ecomode adjusts ultrawork's model routing to favor cheaper models.
</Advanced>

Reviews

No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.

Comments

No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.

No comments yet. Be the first to write one.

Comments are published right away. Do not include personal information such as email addresses or phone numbers. Up to 2 URLs.

0 / 1,000 characters

This form is protected by reCAPTCHA, and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.

More skills from this repository

[OMX] Run an anti-slop cleanup/refactor/deslop workflow

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

wmasfoe/md-editor40Updated Oct 28, 2026

[OMX] Run read-only deep repository analysis and return a ranked synthesis with explicit confidence, concrete file references, and clear evidence-vs-inference boundaries. Use when a user says 'analyze', 'investigate', 'why does', 'what's causing', or needs grounded cross-file explanation before any changes are proposed.

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

wmasfoe/md-editor40Updated Oct 28, 2026

ask

Free

[OMX] Ask a local external advisor CLI (Claude or Gemini) and capture a reusable artifact

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

wmasfoe/md-editor40Updated Oct 28, 2026

[OMX] Strict autonomous loop: $deep-interview -> $ralplan -> $ultragoal (+ $team if needed) -> $code-review -> $ultraqa

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

wmasfoe/md-editor40Updated Oct 28, 2026

[OMX] Stateful validator-gated research loop with native-hook persistence

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

wmasfoe/md-editor40Updated Oct 28, 2026

[OMX] Durable professor-critic research workflow over Codex goal mode without reviving deprecated omx autoresearch

The English summary is being prepared. Showing the original description.

wmasfoe/md-editor40Updated Oct 28, 2026

See all skills by wmasfoe

Report a problem with this skill