ci
Skill9 starsChanged 19 days agoMITView on GitHub
Run the same checks as /verify-all non-interactively, with JSON output and an exit code that reflects overall pass or fail, for CI pipelines, pre-merge gates and automation. Keywords: ci, json, pre-merge, automation, verify
In this repository32 other files it gives its agents.
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- animation-motionSkill
- auth-flowsSkill
- build-from-canvaSkill
- build-from-conversationSkill
- build-from-figmaSkill
- build-from-screenshotSkill
- canva-intakeSkill
- canva-token-inferenceSkill
- conversation-intakeSkill
- design-brief-to-figmaSkill
- design-token-lockSkill
- e2e-test-generatorSkill
- export-design-systemSkill
- figma-intakeSkill
- figma-to-react-workflowSkill
- form-handlingSkill
- indesign-conversionSkill
- lintSkill
- parallel-orchestrationSkill
- react-accessibilitySkill
- react-component-developmentSkill
- react-performance-optimizationSkill
- react-testing-workflowsSkill
- screenshot-intakeSkill
- seo-metadataSkill
- state-managementSkill
- storybook-story-generationSkill
- tdd-from-figmaSkill
- testSkill
- verify-allSkill
- visual-qa-verificationSkill
The file
We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent
1 rule. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 0 are very specific to this project.
≈0
Common · estimate
Many files like this have a rule of this kind.
≈1
Distinctive · estimate
This author's own choices. Worth a look.
0
Very specific
Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.
- Common
- Distinctive
- Very specific
- Distinctive: line 77
When invoked from a CI pipeline, pipe the JSON straight to a downstream step or store it as a build artifact.
≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.
Files
/ci — CI-Optimized Verification
Runs the same checks as /verify-all but in non-interactive, machine-readable mode. Designed for CI pipelines, pre-merge gates, and automation: no prompts, JSON output, exit code reflects overall pass/fail.
Usage
/ci
/ci --skip dead-code,security
/ci --include lint-and-format,types,testsThe slash command wraps ./scripts/verify-all.sh --ci. The --ci flag implies --json and sets non-interactive behavior. Pass --skip or --include to filter checks.
What runs
Same eleven checks as /verify-all, in the same order:
lint-and-format → types → tests → accessibility → tokens → dead-code → security → bundle-size → agent-plugins → renderers → claude-codebundle-size is automatically skipped when no build artifact (dist/, .next/, build/, out/) is present, and agent-plugins when .claude/agent-plugins/ has none. No check requires a dev server, so all of them run in CI without extra setup.
Output
JSON written to stdout:
{
"ok": false,
"summary": { "pass": 8, "fail": 1, "skip": 2, "total": 11 },
"checks": [
{ "name": "lint-and-format", "status": "pass", "exitCode": 0, "durationMs": 2618, "reason": "" },
{ "name": "types", "status": "fail", "exitCode": 1, "durationMs": 1843, "reason": "exit 1" },
{ "name": "tests", "status": "pass", "exitCode": 0, "durationMs": 4205, "reason": "" },
...
{ "name": "bundle-size", "status": "skip", "exitCode": 0, "durationMs": 0, "reason": "no build artifact (dist/.next/build/out)" }
]
}| Field | Meaning |
ok | true only when every check passed or was skipped intentionally |
summary.pass / fail / skip / total | Counts across all checks |
checks[].status | pass | fail | skip |
checks[].exitCode | The exit code returned by the underlying check script |
checks[].durationMs | Wall-clock duration |
checks[].reason | Empty on pass; short reason on fail/skip |
Steps
1. Run the orchestrator in CI mode
./scripts/verify-all.sh --ci $ARGUMENTS2. Surface results to the user
Parse the JSON and report the summary in plain text:
8 passed, 1 failed, 2 skipped
Failing: types (exit 1, 1843ms)When invoked from a CI pipeline, pipe the JSON straight to a downstream step or store it as a build artifact.
Exit codes
0— every check passed or was skipped1— one or more checks failed
The exit code is what CI runners pivot on, so do not swallow it.
Differences vs /verify-all
| Aspect | /verify-all | /ci |
| Output | Human-readable summary table | JSON to stdout |
| Interactivity | Allowed (no prompts today, but reserved) | Forbidden |
| Use case | Local development | CI pipelines, automation, scripts |
| Exit code on failure | 1 | 1 |
Related
/verify-all— human-readable version of the same checks./scripts/verify-all.sh --help— full flag documentation
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.

