Skills DirectorySkills Directory
SkillsLearnSecurityCategoriesDocsCommunityBlog
Sign InSubmit Skill
Skills Directory

Security-tested agent skills for Claude, coding agents, and AI workflows.

Directory

  • Browse Skills
  • All Skills A–Z
  • Claude Skills
  • Claude Code Skills
  • Agent Skills
  • Categories
  • Submit a Skill

Learn

  • Learn Hub
  • Install Claude Skills
  • Write SKILL.md
  • Skills vs MCP
  • Directories Compared

Security

  • Security
  • Methodology
  • Secure Claude Skills
  • Security Badges

Company

  • About
  • Community
  • Blog
  • API Docs
  • Advertise

2026 Skills Directory. All rights reserved.

Back to skills

Is It Ready

ASecurity

Shipping readiness gate — parallel swarm across plan compliance, architecture, code quality, tests, security, product/UX, and operational readiness. Produces a GO / HOLD / FIX-THEN-SHIP verdict with a mandatory auto-fix loop.

8 stars
0 votes
0 copies
0 views
Added 9/20/2026
code-qualitygobashrefactoringgitapidatabasesecurity

Works with

cliapi

Security Analysis

A100/100

Scanned 9/20/2026

Install to Claude Code

$npx -y skills add tstapler/dotfiles --skill is-it-ready --agent claude-code

Installs into .claude/skills of the current project.

Are you the author of Is It Ready?

Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.

Security grade badge for Is It Ready
[![Security: A — Skills Directory](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/api/skills/tstapler-is-it-ready/badge)](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/tstapler-is-it-ready)

More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.

Download Zip
Files
SKILL.md
---
description: Shipping readiness gate — parallel swarm across plan compliance, architecture, code quality, tests, security, product/UX, and operational readiness. Produces a GO / HOLD / FIX-THEN-SHIP verdict with a mandatory auto-fix loop.
---

# Is It Ready? — Shipping Readiness Review

Run a parallel swarm of 7 specialized reviewers against the current changes to produce a single, evidence-backed shipping decision. **After any non-🚀 verdict, auto-fix ALL blocking issues using parallel subagents WITHOUT asking the user. Loop until 🚀 or a hard stop.**

**Scope**: `${1:-current git changes}`

---

## Step 0 — PR Validation

```bash
gh pr list --head $(git branch --show-current) --json number,title,state
```

If a PR exists, check CI and inline comments before continuing. For failing CI: `gh run view <RUN_ID> --log-failed`. For comments: `gh api repos/{owner}/{repo}/pulls/{PR_NUMBER}/comments --paginate | jq '.[] | {id, user: .user.login, path, body: .body[:150]}'`.

Fix bugs, decline style preferences (with reply), push fixes. Record: PR#, failing checks, unresolved comment count, review decision.

---

## Step 1 — Gather Context (this thread only)

```bash
git diff HEAD --stat && git diff HEAD --name-only
```

Also read: existing plan in `project_plans/` or `docs/tasks/`, any `validation.md`. Note language and framework.

Build a **compact change manifest** (≤150 words): list changed files, one-line summary of what each does, which files relate to which review dimension. Agents receive this manifest + their relevant diff slice — never raw full diffs.

---

## Step 2 — Launch 7 Parallel Reviewers

**Dispatch ALL 7 agents in a SINGLE tool invocation block (one message).** This is what enables true parallelism — staggering across messages defeats the purpose. Each agent:
- Gets: (a) compact change manifest, (b) diff sections relevant to its dimension only, (c) strict output format below
- Uses `subagent_type: general-purpose` and `model: haiku`
- May freely read files and search the codebase — but return ONLY what is needed to act on problems found

Required output format (3 lines only):
```
RATING: 🟢/🟡/🔴
BLOCKING: [file:line — one sentence each, or "none"]
NON-BLOCKING: [one sentence each, or "none"]
```

### Agent 1 — Plan Compliance
Verify implementation matches the plan. Check: every requirement has code, no unasked-for features, acceptance criteria traceable to tests.
Rate 🟢 all done / 🟡 minor gaps / 🔴 significant requirements missing.

### Agent 2 — Architecture & Design
Check: SOLID violations, layer boundary crossings, new tight coupling, anti-patterns, inconsistency with existing conventions.
Rate 🟢 sound / 🟡 minor issues / 🔴 causes future pain OR requires systemic redesign.

### Agent 3 — Code Quality
Check: naming clarity, function size, DRY violations, swallowed errors, magic values, misleading comments.
Rate 🟢 clean / 🟡 some issues / 🔴 hard to maintain.

### Agent 4 — Test Quality
Check: behavior coverage vs. coverage theater, missing unhappy paths, test isolation, plan-to-test traceability.
Rate 🟢 high confidence / 🟡 coverage gaps / 🔴 won't catch real bugs.

### Agent 5 — Security
Check: injection vectors, missing auth on new paths, PII in logs, new CVE-bearing deps, weak crypto, unverified external fetches.
Rate 🟢 no new risks / 🟡 low-severity / 🔴 exploitable vulnerability present.

### Agent 6 — Product & UX
Check: all user flows complete, empty/error/loading states handled, error messages actionable, accessibility basics, solves original user problem.
Rate 🟢 ready / 🟡 rough edges / 🔴 confusing or broken.

### Agent 7 — Operational Readiness
Check: no silent catch blocks, new failure modes have logging, backward compatibility, no N+1 or unbounded loops, graceful degradation. (For internal/non-prod tools: SLO dimension is 🟡 informational only, not blocking.)
Rate 🟢 production-ready / 🟡 gaps / 🔴 ships blind.

---

## Step 2.5 — Wait for CI to Complete

**Never issue 🚀 SHIP IT while any CI run is in-progress or queued.** After launching the 7 reviewers (they run concurrently while CI runs), poll until all CI runs reach `completed`:

```bash
gh run list --branch $(git branch --show-current) --limit 5 --json databaseId,status,conclusion,name
```

Repeat every 60 seconds until no run has `status` of `in_progress` or `queued`. Then:
- All conclusions `success` → CI 🟢, proceed to Step 3
- Any conclusion `failure` or `cancelled` → CI 🔴, fetch logs before Step 3:
  ```bash
  gh run view <RUN_ID> --log-failed
  ```

If CI is still running when all 7 reviewers have returned, wait for CI before synthesizing — do not skip this gate.

---

## Step 3 — Synthesize

After all 7 reviewers return **and CI has completed**, produce this report. Include an "Auto-Fixed This Iteration" section listing any issues already resolved in the current fix cycle so the user can track progress.

```markdown
## Is It Ready? — Shipping Gate Report

**Branch**: <name>  **PR**: <#N or none>  **CI**: <pass/fail>  **Date**: <today>  **Iteration**: <N of 5>

| Dimension | Status | Blocking | Notes |
|---|---|---|---|
| CI / PR | 🟢/🟡/🔴 | ... | ... |
| Plan | 🟢/🟡/🔴 | ... | ... |
| Architecture | 🟢/🟡/🔴 | ... | ... |
| Code Quality | 🟢/🟡/🔴 | ... | ... |
| Tests | 🟢/🟡/🔴 | ... | ... |
| Security | 🟢/🟡/🔴 | ... | ... |
| Product/UX | 🟢/🟡/🔴 | ... | ... |
| Ops | 🟢/🟡/🔴 | ... | ... |

## Verdict: [🚀 SHIP IT / ⚠️ FIX THEN SHIP / 🛑 HOLD]

### Blocking Issues
1. [Dimension] file:line — issue

### Non-Blocking
1. [Dimension] — suggestion

### Auto-Fixed This Iteration
- [Dimension] file:line — what was fixed

### Next Action
[One sentence]
```

---

## Step 4 — Fix Loop (MANDATORY — NEVER ASK THE USER)

**NEVER ask before fixing. NEVER pause for confirmation. Fix everything auto-fixable immediately.**

After every verdict that is not 🚀 SHIP IT, fix all auto-fixable blocking issues in parallel subagents, then re-run ONLY the affected reviewer agents (not all 7). Re-synthesize. Repeat until 🚀 or hard stop.

### Auto-fix without asking (run fixes as parallel subagents where independent):
- Code quality: naming, magic values, function size, DRY
- Test gaps: missing unhappy paths, weak assertions, isolation issues
- Silent error handling, swallowed exceptions
- CI lint/format/build failures
- PR inline comment responses (fix bugs, decline style with reply)
- CSS/style convention violations
- Fallback value inconsistencies
- Ops issues: missing logging, N+1 queries, unbounded loops

### Hard stop — only these two conditions pause for human:
1. **Security 🔴** — exploitable vulnerability present
2. **Architecture 🔴** — systemic redesign required (not just refactoring)

Everything else is auto-fixable. When in doubt, fix it.

### Loop mechanics:
```
while verdict != 🚀 SHIP IT:
  1. Group blocking issues by dimension
  2. Launch fix subagents in parallel (one per independent issue or group)
  3. Run tests to confirm fixes didn't break anything
  4. git add + commit + push
  5. Re-run ONLY the reviewer agents whose dimension had blocking issues (parallel, fresh context each)
  6. Re-synthesize verdict (Step 3) — note what was auto-fixed
  7. If blocking issues unchanged after a round → escalate to human
  8. Max 5 iterations before escalating
```

| Dimension | Fix via |
|---|---|
| CI failures | `gh run view <ID> --log-failed` → fix inline → push |
| Code / Tests / Ops | Direct Edit — targeted file only, then verify with test run |
| PR comments | Inline fix or decline reply via `gh api` |
| Architecture (non-systemic) | Targeted refactor subagent with full file context |

---

## Verdict Criteria

| Verdict | Condition |
|---|---|
| 🚀 SHIP IT | All 🟢 or only 🟡 with no blocking issues |
| ⚠️ FIX THEN SHIP | Any fixable blockers — triggers Step 4 immediately |
| 🛑 HOLD | Security 🔴 or Architecture 🔴 requiring systemic redesign |

Security 🔴 or SLO 🔴 on a new user-facing feature → always HOLD.

Attribution

tstaplertstapler
View sourceMore from tstapler →
SSkills DirectorySkills Directory

Your tool, in front of Claude Code builders.

3 founder slots · $299/mo · GSC-verified traffic · sponsors can never buy grades.

See placements

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 (0)

No comments yet. Be the first to comment!

SSkills DirectorySkills Directory

Your tool, in front of Claude Code builders.

3 founder slots · $299/mo · GSC-verified traffic · sponsors can never buy grades.

See placements

Related Skills

Caveman Commit

Ultra-compressed commit message generator. Cuts noise from commit messages while preserving intent and reasoning. Conventional Commits format. Subject ≤50 chars, body only when "why" isn't obvious. Use when user says "write a commit", "commit message", "generate commit", "/commit", or invokes /caveman-commit. Auto-triggers when staging changes.

1023331 votes

Caveman Review

Ultra-compressed code review comments. Cuts noise from PR feedback while preserving the actionable signal. Each comment is one line: location, problem, fix. Use when user says "review this PR", "code review", "review the diff", "/review", or invokes /caveman-review. Auto-triggers when reviewing pull requests.

1023331 votes

Springboot Verification

Verification loop for Spring Boot projects: build, static analysis, tests with coverage, security scans, and diff review before release or PR.

2456590 votes

Verification Loop

一个全面的 Claude Code 会话验证系统。

2456590 votes

Django Verification

Verification loop for Django projects: migrations, linting, tests with coverage, security scans, and deployment readiness checks before release or PR.

2456590 votes
View all in code-quality →