🎁 Get the FREE AI Skills Starter Guide β€” Subscribe β†’
BytesAgainBytesAgain
πŸ¦€ ClawHub

RALSTP Consultant

by @thedragosexperience

Analyze problems using RALSTP (Recursive Agents and Landmarks Strategic-Tactical Planning). Based on PhD thesis by Dorian Buksz (RALSTP). Identifies agents,...

Versionv1.0.1
Downloads1,266
Stars⭐ 2
TERMINAL
clawhub install ralstp-consultant

πŸ“– About This Skill


name: ralstp-consultant description: Analyze problems using RALSTP (Recursive Agents and Landmarks Strategic-Tactical Planning). Based on PhD thesis by Dorian Buksz (RALSTP). Identifies agents, calculates difficulty, and suggests decomposition.

RALSTP Consultant

Based on "Recursive Agents and Landmarks Strategic-Tactical Planning (RALSTP)" by Dorian Buksz, King's College London, 2024.

Core Concepts (from the thesis)

1. Agents Identification

Definition: Agents are objects with dynamic types that are active during goal state search.

How to identify:

  • Dynamic type = appears as first argument of a predicate in any action's effects
  • Static type = never appears in action effects
  • Example: In Driverlog, truck and driver are dynamic (they're in drive action effects), but location is static
  • Real PDDL Example (RTAM Domain):

    (:types  
       ambulance police_car tow_truck fire_brigade - vehicle
       acc_victim vehicle car - subject
       ...
    )
    
  • Agents: ambulance, police_car, tow_truck, fire_brigade (appear in action effects like at, available, busy)
  • Passive: acc_victim, car (acted upon but don't act)
  • 2. Passive Objects

    Objects that are NOT agents β€” things being acted upon but don't act themselves.

  • Packages, cargo, data, files, victims in RTAM
  • 3. Agent Dependencies

    Definition: Relationships between agents based on what preconditions they satisfy for other agents.

    Types:

  • Independent β€” agents that don't depend on each other
  • Dependent β€” agents that need other agents' preconditions satisfied
  • Conflicting β€” agents that interfere with each other
  • 4. Entanglement

    Definition: When agents fight for shared resources (time, space, locations, etc.)

    Measurement:

  • Count of shared predicates
  • Conflict frequency in goal states
  • Real PDDL Example (RTAM - Road Traffic Accident):

    (:durative-action confirm_accident
       :parameters (?V - police_car ?P - subject ?A - accident_location)
       :condition (and (at start (at ?V ?A)) (at start (at ?P ?A)) ...)
       :effect (and (at end (certified ?P)) ...)
    )

    (:durative-action untrap :parameters (?V - fire_brigade ?P - acc_victim ?A - accident_location) :condition (and (at start (certified ?P)) (at start (available ?V)) ...) )

  • Entanglement: police_car must certify BEFORE fire_brigade can untrap
  • Resource conflict: Both need to be at same accident_location
  • Availability: fire_brigade busy during untrap β†’ others must wait
  • 5. Landmarks

    Definition: Facts that must be true in any valid plan (from goals back to initial state).

    Types:

  • Fact landmarks β€” propositions that must hold
  • Action landmarks β€” actions that must be executed
  • Relaxed landmarks β€” landmarks considering only positive effects (ignoring deletes)
  • Real PDDL Example (RTAM - sequential dependencies):

    Goal: (delivered victim1) ∧ (delivered car1)

    Required sequence of fact landmarks: 1. (certified victim1) ← police must confirm 2. (untrapped victim1) ← fire must free them 3. (aided victim1) ← ambulance must treat 4. (loaded victim1 ambulance) ← ambulance must load 5. (at victim1 hospital) ← deliver to hospital 6. (delivered victim1) ← FINAL

    Action landmarks:

  • confirm_accident β†’ untrap β†’ first_aid β†’ load_victim β†’ unload_victim β†’ deliver_victim
  • 6. Strategic vs Tactical

  • Strategic: Abstract planning level. Solve "what needs to happen first" ignoring details.
  • Tactical: Detailed execution level. Solve "exactly how to do it".
  • 7. Difficulty Metrics

    From the thesis, difficulty increases with:

  • More agents in goal state
  • More entangled agents (conflicting dependencies)
  • More inactive dynamic objects not in goal
  • Buksz Complexity Score β‰ˆ Agent Count Γ— Entanglement Factor

    Implementation Note (Natural Language vs PDDL)

    This skill operates in two modes:

    1. Conceptual Mode (Default): Uses the LLM to apply RALSTP methodology to natural language problems (e.g., "Plan a marketing launch"). No PDDL files are required. The agent identifies Agents/Landmarks conceptually. 2. Formal Mode (Optional): If you provide PDDL domain/problem files, the included scripts/analyze.py can be run to mathematically extract agents and landmarks.

    *The instructions below apply to both modes, but "Real PDDL Examples" are provided for technical context.*

    Usage

    For any complex problem, just describe it and I'll apply RALSTP:

    RALSTP analyze: I need to migrate 1000 VMs from datacentre A to B with minimal downtime
    

    Output Format

    ## RALSTP Analysis

    Agents Identified

  • [list agents and their types]
  • Passive Objects

  • [list objects being acted upon]
  • Dependency Graph

  • [which agents depend on which]
  • Difficulty Assessment

  • Agent Count: X
  • Entanglement: Low/Medium/High
  • Estimated Complexity: [score]
  • Strategic Phase

  • [high-level plan ignoring details]
  • Tactical Phase

  • [detailed execution]
  • Decomposition Suggestion

  • Split by: [agent type / landmark / location]
  • Parallelize: [what can run concurrently]
  • Risks: [potential conflicts/entanglements]
  • When to Use

    USE for:

  • Multi-step workflows with multiple actors
  • Migration/tasks with dependencies
  • Resource contention problems
  • Complex orchestrations
  • SKIP for:

  • Simple Q&A
  • Single-task problems
  • Reference

    PhD Thesis: "Recursive Agents and Landmarks Strategic-Tactical Planning (RALSTP)" β€” Dorian Buksz, King's College London, 2024.

    Example: RTAM Domain (IPC-2014)

    Domain: Road Traffic Accident Management

    Source: https://github.com/potassco/pddl-instances/tree/master/ipc-2014/domains/road-traffic-accident-management-temporal-satisficing

    Full Analysis

    Agents (4):

  • ambulance β€” transports victims to hospital
  • police_car β€” certifies accident/victims
  • tow_truck β€” recovers vehicles
  • fire_brigade β€” untraps victims, extinguishes fires
  • Passive Objects:

  • acc_victim β€” people needing help
  • car β€” vehicles involved in accident
  • accident_location, hospital, garage
  • Dependencies (Critical Path):

    police_car β†’ fire_brigade β†’ ambulance β†’ hospital
         ↓            ↓           ↓
      certify      untrap       deliver
    

    Landmarks Chain (must execute in order): 1. confirm_accident (police at scene) 2. untrap (fire frees victim) 3. first_aid (ambulance treats) 4. load_victim β†’ unload_victim β†’ deliver_victim 5. load_car β†’ unload_car β†’ deliver_vehicle

    Entanglement:

  • Multiple vehicles must be at same location (accident scene)
  • Vehicles have limited availability (busy during actions)
  • Sequence constraints: can't deliver before certify
  • Difficulty: High β€” 4 agents, tight dependencies, shared locations

    ⚑ When to Use

    TriggerAction
    - Multi-step workflows with multiple actors
    - Migration/tasks with dependencies
    - Resource contention problems
    - Complex orchestrations
    **SKIP for:**
    - Simple Q&A
    - Single-task problems

    πŸ’‘ Examples

    For any complex problem, just describe it and I'll apply RALSTP:

    RALSTP analyze: I need to migrate 1000 VMs from datacentre A to B with minimal downtime