Skip to content
Back to skills

Ship

ASecurity

Review and finalize (REVIEWER + DOCUMENTER phases) - runs adversarial code review, commits changes, completes task, and submits reflection to update pattern trust scores.

  • 57 stars
  • 0 votes
  • 0 copies
  • 0 views
  • Added October 17, 2026
code-qualityjavascriptrustgojavabashtestinggitapidatabaseci/cd

Works with

  • claude code
  • cli
  • api

Security analysis

A100/100

Scanned October 17, 2026

npx -y skills add diegosouzapw/awesome-omni-skill --skill ship --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Ship?

Add the live security badge to your README. It updates with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Ship
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/diegosouzapw-ship/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/diegosouzapw-ship)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page. Keep it an A: scan every change in CI with Pro.

Download with Pro
SKILL.md
---
name: ship
description: Review and finalize (REVIEWER + DOCUMENTER phases) - runs adversarial code review, commits changes, completes task, and submits reflection to update pattern trust scores.
argument-hint: [task-identifier]
---

<skill name="apex:ship" phase="ship">

<overview>
Final phase: Review implementation with adversarial agents, commit changes, complete task, and submit reflection.

Combines REVIEWER (adversarial code review) and DOCUMENTER (commit, complete, reflect).
</overview>

<phase-model>
phase_model:
  frontmatter: [research, plan, implement, rework, complete]
  rework: enabled
  db_role: [RESEARCH, ARCHITECT, BUILDER, BUILDER_VALIDATOR, REVIEWER, DOCUMENTER]
  legacy_db_role: [VALIDATOR]
source_of_truth:
  gating: frontmatter.phase
  telemetry: db_role
</phase-model>

<phase-gate requires="implement" sets="complete">
  <reads-file>./.apex/tasks/[ID].md</reads-file>
  <requires-section>implementation</requires-section>
  <appends-section>ship</appends-section>
</phase-gate>

<mandatory-actions>
This phase requires THREE mandatory actions in order:
1. **Adversarial Review** - Launch review agents
2. **Git Commit** - Commit all changes
3. **apex_reflect** - Submit pattern outcomes

YOU CANNOT SKIP ANY OF THESE for APPROVE or CONDITIONAL outcomes.
If REJECT, stop after review, set frontmatter to `phase: rework`, and return to `/apex:implement`.
</mandatory-actions>

<initial-response>
<if-no-arguments>
I'll review and finalize the implementation. Please provide the task identifier.

You can find active tasks in `./.apex/tasks/` or run with:
`/apex:ship [identifier]`
</if-no-arguments>
<if-arguments>Load task file and begin review.</if-arguments>
</initial-response>

<workflow>

<step id="1" title="Load task and verify phase">
<instructions>
1. Read `./.apex/tasks/[identifier].md`
2. Verify frontmatter `phase: implement`
3. Parse `<task-contract>` first and note its latest version and any amendments
4. Parse all sections for full context
5. If phase != implement, refuse with: "Task is in [phase] phase. Expected: implement"

Contract rules:
- Final report MUST map changes to AC-* and confirm no out-of-scope work
- If scope/ACs changed during implement, ensure amendments are recorded with rationale and version bump
</instructions>
</step>

<step id="2" title="Gather review context">
<extract>
- `<task-contract>` - Authoritative scope/ACs and amendment history
- `<implementation><files-modified>` - What changed
- `<implementation><files-created>` - What's new
- `<implementation><patterns-used>` - Patterns to validate
- `<implementation><validation-results>` - Test status
- `<implementation><reviewer-handoff>` - Key points for review
- `<plan><architecture-decision>` - Original intentions
- `<plan><warnings>` - Risks to verify mitigated
</extract>

<get-diffs>
```bash
git diff HEAD~N  # or appropriate range for this task's changes
git log --oneline -10
```
</get-diffs>
</step>

<step id="3" title="Phase 1: Launch review agents">
<critical>
Launch ALL 5 Phase 1 agents in a SINGLE message for true parallelism.
</critical>

<agents parallel="true">

<agent type="apex:review:phase1:review-security-analyst">
**Task ID**: [taskId]
**Code Changes**: [Full diff]
**Journey Context**: Architecture warnings, implementation decisions, test results

Review for security vulnerabilities. Return YAML with id, severity, confidence, location, issue, evidence, mitigations_found.
</agent>

<agent type="apex:review:phase1:review-performance-analyst">
**Task ID**: [taskId]
**Code Changes**: [Full diff]
**Journey Context**: Architecture warnings, implementation decisions

Review for performance issues. Return YAML findings.
</agent>

<agent type="apex:review:phase1:review-architecture-analyst">
**Task ID**: [taskId]
**Code Changes**: [Full diff]
**Journey Context**: Original architecture from plan, pattern selections

Review for architecture violations and pattern consistency. Return YAML findings.
</agent>

<agent type="apex:review:phase1:review-test-coverage-analyst">
**Task ID**: [taskId]
**Code Changes**: [Full diff]
**Validation Results**: [From implementation section]

Review for test coverage gaps. Return YAML findings.
</agent>

<agent type="apex:review:phase1:review-code-quality-analyst">
**Task ID**: [taskId]
**Code Changes**: [Full diff]
**Journey Context**: Patterns applied, conventions followed

Review for maintainability and code quality. Return YAML findings.
</agent>

</agents>

<wait-for-all>WAIT for ALL 5 agents to complete before Phase 2.</wait-for-all>
</step>

<step id="4" title="Phase 2: Adversarial challenge">
<agents parallel="true">

<agent type="apex:review:phase2:review-challenger">
**Phase 1 Findings**: [YAML from all 5 Phase 1 agents]
**Original Code**: [Relevant snippets]
**Journey Context**: Plan rationale, implementation justifications

Challenge EVERY finding for:
- Code accuracy (did Phase 1 read correctly?)
- Pattern applicability (does framework prevent this?)
- Evidence quality (Strong/Medium/Weak)
- ROI Analysis:
  - fix_effort: trivial | minor | moderate | significant | major
  - benefit_type: security | reliability | performance | maintainability | correctness
  - roi_score: 0.0-1.0 (benefit / effort ratio)
  - override_decision: pull_forward | keep | push_back
  - override_reason: [Why changing priority]

Return: challenge_result (UPHELD|DOWNGRADED|DISMISSED), evidence_quality, recommended_confidence, roi_analysis
</agent>

<agent type="apex:review:phase2:review-context-defender">
**Phase 1 Findings**: [Findings affecting existing code]
**Repository**: [Path and git info]

Use git history to find justifications for seemingly problematic patterns.
Return: Context justifications for historical code choices.
</agent>

</agents>

<wait-for-all>WAIT for both agents to complete.</wait-for-all>
</step>

<step id="5" title="Synthesize review results">
<confidence-adjustment>
For each finding:
  finalConfidence = phase1Confidence
  finalConfidence *= challengeImpact  # UPHELD=1.0, DOWNGRADED=0.6, DISMISSED=0.2
  finalConfidence *= (0.5 + evidence_score * 0.5)
  if context_justified: finalConfidence *= 0.3
</confidence-adjustment>

<action-decision>
- confidence < 0.3 → DISMISS
- critical AND confidence > 0.5 → FIX_NOW
- high AND confidence > 0.6 → FIX_NOW
- confidence > 0.7 → SHOULD_FIX
- else → NOTE
</action-decision>

<review-decision>
- 0 FIX_NOW → APPROVE (proceed to commit)
- 1-2 FIX_NOW minor → CONDITIONAL (fix or accept with docs)
- 3+ FIX_NOW or critical security → REJECT (return to /apex:implement)
</review-decision>

<reject-flow>
On REJECT:
1. Write `<ship><decision>REJECT</decision>` with a brief rationale
2. Update frontmatter: `phase: rework`, `updated: [ISO timestamp]`
3. STOP. Do NOT commit or call apex_reflect. Return to `/apex:implement`.
</reject-flow>
</step>

<step id="5.5" title="Documentation Updates">
<purpose>
Ensure documentation stays in sync with code changes.
</purpose>

<documentation-checklist>
**If task modified workflow or architecture**:
- [ ] CLAUDE.md - Check for stale references to changed behavior
- [ ] README.md - Update any affected workflow descriptions
- [ ] Related design docs - Search in docs/ directory

**If task modified API or CLI**:
- [ ] API documentation files
- [ ] CLI command documentation
- [ ] Usage examples in docs

**If task modified data structures**:
- [ ] Type definition docs
- [ ] Schema documentation
- [ ] Migration notes if breaking change

**Search strategy**:
```bash
# Find docs that might reference changed files
for file in [modified_files]; do
  grep -r "$(basename $file .ts)" docs/ README.md CLAUDE.md
done
```
</documentation-checklist>

<update-procedure>
1. Search for references to modified code
2. Read each found doc FULLY
3. Update outdated references
4. Verify accuracy after update
5. Add to git staging for commit
</update-procedure>

<docs-to-update-output>
Record in `<implementation><docs-updated>`:
```xml
<docs-updated>
  <doc path="[path]" reason="[Why updated]"/>
</docs-updated>
```
</docs-to-update-output>
</step>

<step id="6" title="Git commit">
<critical>
Commit BEFORE apex_reflect - reflection validates git evidence.
</critical>

<commands>
```bash
git status --short
git add [relevant files]
git commit -m "[Task ID]: [Description]

🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code)

Co-Authored-By: Claude <noreply@anthropic.com>"
git log -1 --oneline  # Capture commit SHA
```
</commands>

<checkpoint>Commit SHA captured for evidence.</checkpoint>
</step>

<step id="7" title="apex_task_complete">
<call>
```javascript
apex_task_complete({
  id: taskId,
  outcome: "success" | "partial" | "failure",
  key_learning: "Main lesson from this task",
  patterns_used: ["PAT:ID:FROM:PLAN"]  // Only patterns from plan
})
```
</call>

<returns>ReflectionDraft - use as basis for apex_reflect</returns>
</step>

<step id="8" title="apex_reflect">
<critical>
YOU MUST CALL apex_reflect. THIS IS NOT OPTIONAL.

Without apex_reflect:
- Pattern trust scores don't update
- Learnings aren't captured
- Future tasks don't benefit
</critical>

<format-choice>
**batch_patterns** (simple, for most cases):
```javascript
apex_reflect({
  task: { id: taskId, title: taskTitle },
  outcome: "success",
  batch_patterns: [
    {
      pattern: "PAT:ID",  // Must exist in plan's pattern list
      outcome: "worked-perfectly",
      notes: "Optional notes about usage"
    }
  ]
})
```

**claims** (advanced, for new patterns/anti-patterns/learnings):
```javascript
apex_reflect({
  task: { id: taskId, title: taskTitle },
  outcome: "success",
  claims: {
    // Patterns used from plan (updates trust scores)
    patterns_used: [{
      pattern_id: "PAT:ID",
      evidence: [{
        kind: "git_lines",
        file: "src/auth.ts",
        sha: "HEAD",  // or commit SHA
        start: 45,
        end: 78
      }]
    }],

    // Trust score updates (required for patterns_used)
    trust_updates: [{
      pattern_id: "PAT:ID",
      outcome: "worked-perfectly"
    }],

    // NEW patterns discovered during implementation
    new_patterns: [{
      title: "Error Boundary Pattern",
      summary: "Wrap async operations with consistent error handling",
      snippets: [{
        snippet_id: "error-boundary-1",
        source_ref: {
          kind: "git_lines",
          file: "src/utils/errors.ts",
          sha: "HEAD",
          start: 10,
          end: 35
        }
      }],
      evidence: []
    }],

    // Anti-patterns to AVOID
    anti_patterns: [{
      title: "Direct Database Access in Handler",
      reason: "Bypasses transaction management and audit logging",
      evidence: [{
        kind: "git_lines",
        file: "src/handlers/user.ts",
        sha: "HEAD",
        start: 100,
        end: 110
      }]
    }],

    // General learnings
    learnings: [{
      assertion: "JWT refresh tokens require httpOnly cookies for security",
      evidence: [{
        kind: "git_lines",
        file: "src/auth/tokens.ts",
        sha: "HEAD",
        start: 50,
        end: 65
      }]
    }]
  }
})
```
</format-choice>

<evidence-kinds>
| Kind | Required Fields | When to Use |
|------|-----------------|-------------|
| `git_lines` | file, sha, start, end | Code at specific lines |
| `commit` | sha | Entire commit as evidence |
| `pr` | number, repo | Pull request reference |
| `ci_run` | id, provider | CI/CD run evidence |
</evidence-kinds>

<valid-outcomes>
- "worked-perfectly" → 100% success (alpha: 1.0, beta: 0.0)
- "worked-with-tweaks" → 70% success (alpha: 0.7, beta: 0.3)
- "partial-success" → 50% success (alpha: 0.5, beta: 0.5)
- "failed-minor-issues" → 30% success (alpha: 0.3, beta: 0.7)
- "failed-completely" → 0% success (alpha: 0.0, beta: 1.0)
</valid-outcomes>

<common-errors>
1. **Mixing formats**: Use batch_patterns OR claims, not both
2. **Missing SHA**: Always include sha (use "HEAD" if current)
3. **Fabricated patterns**: Only claim patterns from plan
4. **Not committing first**: Evidence validation fails without commit
</common-errors>
</step>

<step id="9" title="Write ship section to task file">
<output-format>
Append to `<ship>` section:

```xml
<ship>
<metadata>
  <timestamp>[ISO]</timestamp>
  <outcome>success|partial|failure</outcome>
  <commit-sha>[SHA]</commit-sha>
</metadata>

<review-summary>
  <phase1-findings count="X">
    <by-severity critical="N" high="N" medium="N" low="N"/>
    <by-agent security="N" performance="N" architecture="N" testing="N" quality="N"/>
  </phase1-findings>
  <phase2-challenges>
    <upheld>N</upheld>
    <downgraded>N</downgraded>
    <dismissed>N</dismissed>
  </phase2-challenges>
  <false-positive-rate>[X%]</false-positive-rate>
</review-summary>

<contract-verification>
  <contract-version>[N]</contract-version>
  <amendments-audited>[List amendments or "none"]</amendments-audited>
  <acceptance-criteria-verification>
    <criterion id="AC-1" status="met|not-met">[Evidence or exception]</criterion>
  </acceptance-criteria-verification>
  <out-of-scope-check>[Confirm no out-of-scope work slipped in]</out-of-scope-check>
</contract-verification>

<action-items>
  <fix-now>
    <item id="[ID]" severity="[S]" confidence="[C]" location="[file:line]">
      [Issue and fix]
    </item>
  </fix-now>
  <should-fix>[Deferred items]</should-fix>
  <accepted>[Accepted risks with justification]</accepted>
  <dismissed>[False positives with reasons]</dismissed>
</action-items>

<commit>
  <sha>[Full SHA]</sha>
  <message>[Commit message]</message>
  <files>[List of files]</files>
</commit>

<reflection>
  <patterns-reported>
    <pattern id="PAT:X:Y" outcome="[outcome]"/>
  </patterns-reported>
  <key-learning>[Main lesson]</key-learning>
  <apex-reflect-status>submitted|failed</apex-reflect-status>
</reflection>

<final-summary>
  <what-was-built>[Concise description]</what-was-built>
  <patterns-applied count="N">[List]</patterns-applied>
  <test-status passed="X" failed="Y"/>
  <documentation-updated>[What docs changed]</documentation-updated>
</final-summary>
</ship>
```
</output-format>

<update-frontmatter>
For APPROVE or CONDITIONAL only:
Set `phase: complete`, `status: complete`, and `updated: [ISO timestamp]`
</update-frontmatter>
</step>

<step id="10" title="Final report to user">
<template>
✅ **Task Complete**: [Title]

📊 **Metrics**:
- Complexity: [X]/10
- Files modified: [N]
- Files created: [N]
- Tests: [passed]/[total]

💬 **Summary**: [Concise description of what was built]

📚 **Patterns**:
- Applied: [N] patterns
- Reflection: ✅ Submitted

✅ **Acceptance Criteria**:
- AC-* coverage: [met|not met with exceptions]

🔍 **Review**:
- Phase 1 findings: [N]
- Dismissed as false positives: [N] ([X]%)
- Action items: [N] (all resolved)

⏭️ **Next**: Task complete. No further action required.
</template>
</step>

</workflow>

<completion-verification>
BEFORE reporting to user, verify ALL actions completed:

- [ ] Phase 1 review agents launched and returned?
- [ ] Phase 2 challenge agents launched and returned (with ROI analysis)?
- [ ] Documentation checklist completed?
- [ ] Contract verification completed (AC mapping + out-of-scope check)?
- [ ] Git commit created? (verify with git log -1)
- [ ] apex_task_complete called? (received ReflectionDraft?)
- [ ] apex_reflect called? (received ok: true?)

**If ANY unchecked → GO BACK AND COMPLETE IT.**
</completion-verification>

<success-criteria>
- Adversarial review completed (7 agents: 5 Phase 1 + 2 Phase 2)
- ROI analysis included in challenger findings
- Documentation checklist completed (grep → read → update → verify)
- Contract verification completed with AC mapping and scope confirmation
- All FIX_NOW items resolved (or explicitly accepted)
- Git commit created with proper message
- apex_task_complete called
- apex_reflect called with proper format (batch_patterns or claims)
- Task file updated with complete ship section
- Frontmatter shows phase: complete, status: complete
</success-criteria>

</skill>

Attribution

Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.

Comments

Loading comments…

Newsletter

Get the weekly list of safe new skills, and the ones we pulled.