agentleFS
genkovichgenkovich/sdd/skills/ship/SKILL.md

ship

Skill187 starsChanged 5 months agoMITView on GitHub

Use to close the loop after review — verify the feature actually works, write the changelog / knowledge-base note, and open the pull request. Triggers on "ship {slug}", "open a PR for {slug}", "changelog for {slug}", "prepare {slug} for merge", "/sdd:ship {slug}", "відправ фічу {slug}", "створи PR для {slug}", "changelog для {slug}". Re-runs the gate, runs the app/feature to confirm the spec's outcomes for real (not just green tests), drafts a changelog + PR body that link spec/ AC/ADRs, and proposes the PR command for whatever forge the repo uses. Never auto-merges to main.

  • Commits and pushes

194 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use ios-sync, open-gstack-browser and 10 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.
  • Saqlain-811Skill

    ios-sync

    Regenerate the iOS debug bridge against the latest upstream gstack templates. (gstack)

    Also in 6 projects that use this

  • seek888Skill

    open-gstack-browser

    Launch GStack Browser — AI-controlled Chromium with the sidebar extension baked in. Opens a visible browser window where you can watch every action in real time. The sidebar shows a live activity feed and chat. Anti-bot stealth built in. Use when asked to "open gstack browser", "launch browser", "connect chrome", "open chrome", "real browser", "launch chrome", "side panel", or "control my browser". Voice triggers (speech-to-text aliases): "show me the browser".

    Also in 10 projects that use this

  • ayudaySkill

    setup-deploy

    Configure deployment settings for /land-and-deploy. Detects your deploy platform (Fly.io, Render, Vercel, Netlify, Heroku, GitHub Actions, custom), production URL, health check endpoints, and deploy status commands. Writes the configuration to CLAUDE.md so all future deploys are automatic. Use when: "setup deploy", "configure deployment", "set up land-and-deploy", "how do I deploy with gstack", "add deploy config".

    Also in 19 projects that use this

  • ShreyRaviSkill

    landing-report

    Read-only queue dashboard for workspace-aware ship. Shows which VERSION slots are currently claimed by open PRs, which sibling Conductor workspaces have WIP work likely to ship soon, and what slot /ship would pick next. No mutations — just a snapshot. Use when asked to "landing report", "what's in the queue", "show me open PRs", or "which version do I claim next". (gstack)

    Also in 9 projects that use this

  • zebbernSkill

    debug-fix

    Find and fix a bug or issue — from any source (GitHub issue, error message, user report, or observed behavior)

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • ramybarsoumSkill

    document-release

    Post-ship documentation update. Reads all project docs, cross-references the diff, updates README/ARCHITECTURE/CONTRIBUTING/CLAUDE.md to match what shipped, polishes CHANGELOG voice, cleans up TODOS, and optionally bumps VERSION. Use when asked to "update the docs", "sync documentation", or "post-ship docs". Proactively suggest after a PR is merged or code is shipped.

    Also in 23 projects that use this

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 180 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
  1. Very specific:

    Read: spec.md (what to claim in the changelog), Accepted adr/ (decisions worth recording), the feature's commits (the SDD-Task history).

    line 31
  2. Distinctive:

    Commit before the PR: Ensure the work is on a feature branch (not the default branch).

    line 38
  3. Distinctive:

    "Tests pass" ≠ "it works": Run the actual feature against the spec's outcomes.

    line 52
  4. Distinctive:

    Claiming verified when you only compiled: If the runtime/Docker wasn't available, say what was deferred — don't overstate.

    line 53
  5. Distinctive:

    Forgetting the migration/rollback note: when the change includes one — the deployer needs it.

    line 56

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 180 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.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Skill: ship

The closing step. review confirmed the change is correct on paper; ship confirms it works in reality and packages it for merge. The loop ends here: a reviewed, verified change with a changelog and an open PR — not a merge to main (that stays a human decision).

Forge-agnostic and stack-agnostic: the verification commands are detected the way implement detects them; the PR step targets whatever forge the remote points at (GitHub via gh, GitLab via glab, or copy-paste).

Changelog + PR-body prose follow artifact_language — commit messages, branch names and the SDD-Task/SDD-AC trailers stay English → ../_shared/artifact-language.md.

Owner

The implementer (drives) + the reviewer who signed off in review.

Inputs

  • <slug> — feature slug.
  • Gate (hard refuse): a PASS review record (docs/features/<slug>/_review/) or, at minimum, an implemented + gate-green change. No review yet → «run review <slug> first».
  • Read: spec.md (what to claim in the changelog), Accepted adr/ (decisions worth recording), the feature's commits (the SDD-Task history).

Protocol

  1. Final verification — does it actually work. Re-run the detected gate (unit + integration where available + lint + vet). Then run the feature for real against its acceptance criteria — not just "tests pass": start the app / hit the endpoint / exercise the flow and observe the spec's outcomes (e.g. the default-on read returns defaults; an invalid value is rejected). Concretely: spot-check at least 3 of the most critical §5 AC outcomes (fewer only if the spec has fewer; scale the count with the feature's breadth), and for each name the AC id + the behaviour actually observed — «AC-03: posted the same apply twice → one discount row» — so the verification is checkable, not a vibe. If the app can't be run here (no runtime, no Docker), say so explicitly and record what was verified vs deferred — never claim verified-working when only tests compiled.
  2. Write the changelog / KB note. From ./templates/changelog.md: what changed, why (link spec + the key ADRs), any migration/operational note (e.g. "adds migration 000023 — run it on deploy"), and how to use it. Partner-facing if the change is partner-facing.
  3. Update the roadmap. In docs/roadmap.md (via roadmap) set the step's Status: shipped and add the date + the changelog link to Shipped (the PR link follows once the PR exists). This is the anti-drift hook: delivery itself keeps the roadmap current. (No roadmap yet → skip; it's optional.)
  4. Commit before the PR. Ensure the work is on a feature branch (not the default branch). Then commit per ../_shared/write-and-commit.md — one commit per document: ship: <slug> changelog, ship: <slug> roadmap.md shipped (skipped when there is no roadmap). These commits land on the feature branch, so the PR carries them.
  5. Prepare the PR. Draft the PR body from ./templates/pr-body.md: summary, the AC it satisfies, links to spec/sad/ADRs, the SDD-Task commit list, the test + verification evidence, and any migration/rollback note.
  6. Detect the forge + propose the PR command. Inspect the remote: github.com → gh pr create; gitlab.com/self-hosted GitLab → glab mr create; otherwise print the branch + body for manual creation. Propose the command — do not run a push/PR to a shared remote without the user's go-ahead, and never merge to main.
  7. Summary (terminal handoff). Emit the stage-handoff block per ../_shared/handoff.md (terminal variant) — What I did (verification result: verified-working / what was deferred and why; the roadmap update; the commits with short SHAs) + Review (the changelog path + the PR) + Run next = Done: the PR command (or URL if the user ran it) — merging to main is your call; there is no /sdd successor.

Definition of Done

  • The gate was re-run and the feature was exercised against its AC (or the deferral was stated explicitly with the reason).
  • A changelog / KB note exists, linking spec + ADRs; it (and the roadmap update) is committed on the feature branch before the PR command.
  • A PR body is prepared and the forge-appropriate PR command proposed (work on a feature branch; main untouched).
  • The run-the-feature verification (real run against the ACs, not just green tests) is this skill's structural self-check (../_shared/self-check.md); its result is reported in the handoff.

Anti-patterns

  • "Tests pass" ≠ "it works". Run the actual feature against the spec's outcomes; green unit tests don't prove the wired system behaves.
  • Claiming verified when you only compiled. If the runtime/Docker wasn't available, say what was deferred — don't overstate.
  • Auto-merging to main / pushing to a shared remote unasked. Propose the PR; the merge is the team's call.
  • A changelog that restates the diff. Say what changed and why (link the spec + ADR), plus the operational note (migrations, flags) — not a file list.
  • Forgetting the migration/rollback note when the change includes one — the deployer needs it.

References & template

  • ./templates/changelog.md — changelog / KB-note scaffold.
  • ./templates/pr-body.md — PR description scaffold.

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.