release-readiness
Skill0 starsChanged 2 months agoMITView on GitHub
Audit whether a software project is ready to release by checking tests, builds, package contents, documentation, secrets, permissions, versioning, migrations, and rollback evidence. Use when publishing packages, tags, GitHub releases, deployments, app installers, or when asked for a release checklist or go/no-go decision.
48 other projects use a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- voyager67/AgentFieldkittheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- RaditteAnggoro/skill-for-lazy-developertheir own version, first seen Nov 8, 2026
- nledford/engineering-review-boardtheir own version, first seen Nov 3, 2026
- pulsejet/memoriestheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- florian101010/awesome-agentic-AI-coding-templatetheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
- Kin9Zeus/senior-engineer-skillstheir own version, first seen Nov 1, 2026
Used with
Projects with it also use dependency-cve-sweep, fleet-standard-adoption and 9 more.
Other files people use alongside this one.
Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
berntpoppSkilldependency-cve-sweep
Use when handling Dependabot PRs, CodeQL/Trivy alerts, or doing a routine dependency/CVE sweep for this repo.
Also in 12 projects that use this
- berntpoppSkill
fleet-standard-adoption
Use when bringing this repo into compliance with a GeneFoundry fleet standard (tool-naming, response-envelope, container-hardening, versioning, MCP transport, or logging) or closing its tracking issue.
Also in 12 projects that use this
VersoXBTSkillcode-quality-review
Perform structured code reviews enforcing quality standards, naming conventions, architecture patterns, and team agreements. Use when the user says 'review this code', 'code review', 'check quality', 'review my PR', 'what's wrong with this', 'improve this code', 'review before merge', 'peer review', or 'audit this'. Also triggers on 'code quality', 'review standards', 'enforce conventions', 'tech debt check', 'lint review', or when user completes a significant code change.
Also in 12 projects that use this
ffsshhttiikkSkillunit-testing
Unit testing best practices and patterns
Also in 3 projects that use this
jarosser06Skilltest-strategy
Plans pytest test strategies for Drift's 90%+ coverage requirement using coverage analysis, edge case identification, and test suite design. Use when determining what tests to write, analyzing coverage gaps, or planning test strategies.
Also in 4 projects that use this
SentrySkillsecurity-review
Finds exploitable application security vulnerabilities in code changes. Use for Warden security scans, appsec review, OWASP-style checks, authentication or authorization bugs, injection, XSS, SSRF, path traversal, secrets, unsafe crypto, webhook verification, open redirects, or sensitive data exposure.
Also in 17 projects that use this
- +2 more from berntpopp
Other versions48 projects use a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 48
- dotnet/maui★ 23ksame name
- pulsejet/memories★ 3.9ksame name
- AIEraDev/Clypra★ 3.4ksame name
- jordanhubbard/nanolang★ 629same name
- petrkindlmann/qa-skills★ 209same name
- colasama/MahoShojo-Generator★ 167same name
- MRCalderon3D/everything-game-dev-code★ 105same name
- Azure/odinforazurelocal★ 20same name
- jpantsjoha/ai-native-developer-experience★ 13same name
- nledford/engineering-review-board★ 11same name
38 more not listed
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository10 other files it gives its agents.
- browser-policy-auditSkill
- browser-session-auditSkill
- bug-reproducerSkill
- ci-failure-triageSkill
- devtools-security-auditSkill
- dom-trust-auditSkill
- pr-proofreaderSkill
- security-finding-writerSkill
- ship-safeSkill
- web-security-scopeSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
5 rules. 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.
0
Common
Most of the 47 edited versions we read keep these.
4
Distinctive
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
1
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 16
Run the repository's real test, lint/typecheck, build, and packaging commands.
- Distinctive: line 18
Test a clean install or startup from the artifact—not the working tree.
- Very specific: line 22
Do not hide failures behind --force, disabled checks, broad permissions, or undocumented exceptions.
- Distinctive: line 28
GO:: all required evidence passed and residual risks are documented.
- Distinctive: line 32
Read references/preflight.md for ecosystem-specific artifact checks.
“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 47 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
Release readiness
Produce an evidence-based go/no-go decision. A release is not ready because files look complete; verify the artifact users will receive.
Workflow
- Identify release target, version, channels, supported platforms, and irreversible steps.
- Inspect version consistency, changelog, license, user-facing docs, migration notes, and compatibility promises.
- Run the repository's real test, lint/typecheck, build, and packaging commands.
- Inspect the produced archive/binary/container: expected files only, no secrets, source maps or fixtures unless intentional, executable entry points, and reproducible metadata where supported.
- Test a clean install or startup from the artifact—not the working tree.
- Review workflow permissions, provenance/signing, dependency advisories, release credentials, and rollback/recovery path.
- Classify blockers. Do not publish, tag, deploy, or mutate remotes without explicit approval.
Do not hide failures behind --force, disabled checks, broad permissions, or undocumented exceptions. Redact secret values and recommend rotation if exposure is confirmed.
Decision policy
- NO-GO: security exposure, data-loss risk, broken install/startup, failed required checks, missing migration/rollback for state changes, or unsupported artifact.
- CONDITIONAL: bounded issue with named owner and explicit acceptance.
- GO: all required evidence passed and residual risks are documented.
Return the decision, blockers, evidence table, artifact details, rollback plan, and exact approved publish commands not yet executed.
Read references/preflight.md for ecosystem-specific artifact checks.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.