agentleFS
tmussertmusser/ai-engineering-skills/skills/ship-mini/SKILL.md

ship-mini

Skill6 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub

Run a lightweight activation GO or NO-GO gate only when verified work is about to gain material real-world side effects, autonomy, permissions, or production/shared-state impact.

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

6 rules. About 0 are common, 2 are distinctive, and 4 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈2

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 4

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Use after verification when activation introduces one or more material operational risks:

    line 16
  2. Very specific:

    Do not create SHIP.md when no material activation risk exists.

    line 29
  3. Very specific:

    If an operator profile is available, apply its Autonomy boundary as an additional ceiling.

    line 56
  4. Very specific:

    Create or update SHIP.md with the activation decision and only the operational evidence needed for GO / NO-GO.

    line 65
  5. Distinctive:

    Do not rerun tests, builds, lint, data-quality checks, or model validation unless activation changed the environment or inputs in a way …

    line 67
  6. Very specific:

    When activation risk is PRESENT:

    line 81

≈ “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.

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

Ship Mini

Purpose

Decide whether verified work is safe and authorized to activate in a real operating environment.

verify-contract owns correctness and evidence. ship-mini does not re-verify the implementation; it owns the additional operational question: should this verified thing be allowed to act on the world now?

When to use

Use after verification when activation introduces one or more material operational risks:

  • production or shared-state writes
  • scheduled, autonomous, or unattended execution
  • sending, publishing, triggering jobs, or other external side effects
  • new or expanded tool permissions
  • secrets, credentials, PII, or sensitive-data access
  • destructive or difficult-to-reverse actions
  • a required human approval boundary
  • a meaningful rollback, audit, or owner-notification requirement

Skip ship-mini for ordinary local or interactive changes whose effects remain reviewable and reversible. A user-facing change, shared report, dashboard update, model result, or successful verify-contract does not require ship-mini merely because it may be released or seen by others.

Do not create SHIP.md when no material activation risk exists.

Inputs

  • VERIFY.md status and evidence reference
  • What will be activated and where
  • Allowed tools / actions
  • Forbidden tools / actions
  • Target environment or shared state
  • Destructive or irreversible operations
  • Secrets, credentials, PII, or sensitive-data scope
  • Dry-run or staged activation path when relevant
  • Human approval gates
  • Audit logging
  • Rollback / disable path
  • Owner notification
  • Stop conditions
  • Optional operator profile Autonomy boundary

Workflow

  1. Confirm the implementation already has sufficient verification evidence. Reference VERIFY.md; do not replay correctness checks merely because ship-mini is invoked.
  2. Classify activation risk:
    • NONE — no material side effect, autonomy, permission, data, or rollback boundary exists. Stop without creating SHIP.md.
    • PRESENT — one or more material activation risks exist. Continue.
  3. Name the exact activation surface: what will run, write, send, publish, trigger, access, or mutate, and in which environment.
  4. Record allowed and forbidden actions, permission/data boundaries, destructive operations, and required human gates.
  5. If an operator profile is available, apply its Autonomy boundary as an additional ceiling. propose-only or human-gate-side-effects may require an earlier human gate. bounded-execution does not grant activation permission; it only means the profile itself adds no stricter gate inside already-authorized bounded work.
  6. Confirm the smallest practical dry-run or staged activation path when one exists.
  7. Confirm rollback or disable path before irreversible or shared-state effects are enabled.
  8. Confirm audit logging, owner notification, and stop conditions when unattended or externally visible effects are possible.
  9. Resolve any REVIEW_REQUIRED verification item that affects activation safety. A functional FAIL cannot be shipped.
  10. Create or update SHIP.md with the activation decision and only the operational evidence needed for GO / NO-GO.

Do not rerun tests, builds, lint, data-quality checks, or model validation unless activation changed the environment or inputs in a way that invalidates the existing verification evidence.

Activation gate

Status: GO | NO-GO

  • GO only when verification is trustworthy for the activated state and every material activation boundary is explicit enough to operate safely.
  • An operator profile may make the activation gate stricter, but it cannot authorize a side effect, permission, or deployment that the task and runtime did not already allow.
  • NO-GO when a required approval, permission boundary, data boundary, rollback path, audit path, owner notification, or stop condition is unresolved.
  • NO-GO when verification is FAIL.
  • REVIEW_REQUIRED verification may proceed only after a human explicitly resolves or accepts the item and it does not hide a functional failure.

Outputs

When activation risk is PRESENT:

  • SHIP.md
  • GO / NO-GO decision
  • Activation surface
  • Operational blockers
  • Accepted operational risks
  • Human gates
  • Rollback / disable path
  • Audit / notification / stop conditions when relevant

When activation risk is NONE:

  • No SHIP.md
  • Continue from verification to the next appropriate workflow step

Stop conditions

  • Activation risk is NONE; skip the skill artifact.
  • GO is recorded with operational boundaries explicit.
  • NO-GO is recorded because a material activation boundary remains unresolved.

Anti-patterns

  • Running ship-mini after every successful verify-contract.
  • Re-running correctness checks already captured in VERIFY.md without evidence they became stale.
  • Treating ordinary release, sharing, or visibility as activation risk by itself.
  • Creating SHIP.md when no material side effect or operational boundary exists.
  • Shipping autonomous or external side effects without approval, rollback, audit, or stop conditions appropriate to the risk.

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.