ship

SkillCloud & infra

Ship workflow: detect + merge base branch, run tests, review diff, bump VERSION, update CHANGELOG, commit, push, create PR. Use when asked to "ship", "deploy", "push to main", "create a PR", or "merge and push".

Available today. Use it from your connected AI after setup.

Connect ahel once, and every AI you use reads what you have installed.

Then ask your AI: use the ship skill

What this skill tells your AI

The instructions your AI receives, as published by willnigri/agentic-tool-optimization in .claude/skills/ship/SKILL.md and read by ahel’s review.

Preamble (run first)

_UPD=$(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-update-check 2>/dev/null || .claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-update-check 2>/dev/null || true)
[ -n "$_UPD" ] && echo "$_UPD" || true
mkdir -p ~/.gstack/sessions
touch ~/.gstack/sessions/"$PPID"
_SESSIONS=$(find ~/.gstack/sessions -mmin -120 -type f 2>/dev/null | wc -l | tr -d ' ')
find ~/.gstack/sessions -mmin +120 -type f -delete 2>/dev/null || true
_CONTRIB=$(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config get gstack_contributor 2>/dev/null || true)
_BRANCH=$(git branch --show-current 2>/dev/null || echo "unknown")
echo "BRANCH: $_BRANCH"
_LAKE_SEEN=$([ -f ~/.gstack/.completeness-intro-seen ] && echo "yes" || echo "no")
echo "LAKE_INTRO: $_LAKE_SEEN"

If output shows UPGRADE_AVAILABLE <old> <new>: read ~/.claude/skills/gstack/gstack-upgrade/SKILL.md and follow the "Inline upgrade flow" (auto-upgrade if configured, otherwise AskUserQuestion with 4 options, write snooze state if declined). If JUST_UPGRADED <from> <to>: tell user "Running gstack v{to} (just updated!)" and continue.

If LAKE_INTRO is no: Before continuing, introduce the Completeness Principle. Tell the user: "gstack follows the Boil the Lake principle — always do the complete thing when AI makes the marginal cost near-zero. Read more: https://garryslist.org/posts/boil-the-ocean" Then offer to open the essay in their default browser:

open https://garryslist.org/posts/boil-the-ocean
touch ~/.gstack/.completeness-intro-seen

Only run open if the user says yes. Always run touch to mark as seen. This only happens once.

AskUserQuestion Format

ALWAYS follow this structure for every AskUserQuestion call:

  1. Re-ground: State the project, the current branch (use the _BRANCH value printed by the preamble — NOT any branch from conversation history or gitStatus), and the current plan/task. (1-2 sentences)
  2. Simplify: Explain the problem in plain English a smart 16-year-old could follow. No raw function names, no internal jargon, no implementation details. Use concrete examples and analogies. Say what it DOES, not what it's called.
  3. Recommend: RECOMMENDATION: Choose [X] because [one-line reason] — always prefer the complete option over shortcuts (see Completeness Principle). Include Completeness: X/10 for each option. Calibration: 10 = complete implementation (all edge cases, full coverage), 7 = covers happy path but skips some edges, 3 = shortcut that defers significant work. If both options are 8+, pick the higher; if one is ≤5, flag it.
  4. Options: Lettered options: A) ... B) ... C) ... — when an option involves effort, show both scales: (human: ~X / CC: ~Y)

Assume the user hasn't looked at this window in 20 minutes and doesn't have the code open. If you'd need to read the source to understand your own explanation, it's too complex.

Per-skill instructions may add additional formatting rules on top of this baseline.

Completeness Principle — Boil the Lake

AI-assisted coding makes the marginal cost of completeness near-zero. When you present options:

  • If Option A is the complete implementation (full parity, all edge cases, 100% coverage) and Option B is a shortcut that saves modest effort — always recommend A. The delta between 80 lines and 150 lines is meaningless with CC+gstack. "Good enough" is the wrong instinct when "complete" costs minutes more.
  • Lake vs. ocean: A "lake" is boilable — 100% test coverage for a module, full feature implementation, handling all edge cases, complete error paths. An "ocean" is not — rewriting an entire system from scratch, adding features to dependencies you don't control, multi-quarter platform migrations. Recommend boiling lakes. Flag oceans as out of scope.
  • When estimating effort, always show both scales: human team time and CC+gstack time. The compression ratio varies by task type — use this reference:
Task typeHuman teamCC+gstackCompression
Boilerplate / scaffolding2 days15 min~100x
Test writing1 day15 min~50x
Feature implementation1 week30 min~30x
Bug fix + regression test4 hours15 min~20x
Architecture / design2 days4 hours~5x
Research / exploration1 day3 hours~3x
  • This principle applies to test coverage, error handling, documentation, edge cases, and feature completeness. Don't skip the last 10% to "save time" — with AI, that 10% costs seconds.

Anti-patterns — DON'T do this:

  • BAD: "Choose B — it covers 90% of the value with less code." (If A is only 70 lines more, choose A.)
  • BAD: "We can skip edge case handling to save time." (Edge case handling costs minutes with CC.)
  • BAD: "Let's defer test coverage to a follow-up PR." (Tests are the cheapest lake to boil.)
  • BAD: Quoting only human-team effort: "This would take 2 weeks." (Say: "2 weeks human / ~1 hour CC.")

Contributor Mode

If _CONTRIB is true: you are in contributor mode. You're a gstack user who also helps make it better.

At the end of each major workflow step (not after every single command), reflect on the gstack tooling you used. Rate your experience 0 to 10. If it wasn't a 10, think about why. If there is an obvious, actionable bug OR an insightful, interesting thing that could have been done better by gstack code or skill markdown — file a field report. Maybe our contributor will help make us better!

Calibration — this is the bar: For example, $B js "await fetch(...)" used to fail with SyntaxError: await is only valid in async functions because gstack didn't wrap expressions in async context. Small, but the input was reasonable and gstack should have handled it — that's the kind of thing worth filing. Things less consequential than this, ignore.

NOT worth filing: user's app bugs, network errors to user's URL, auth failures on user's site, user's own JS logic bugs.

To file: write ~/.gstack/contributor-logs/{slug}.md with all sections below (do not truncate — include every section through the Date/Version footer):

# {Title}

Hey gstack team — ran into this while using /{skill-name}:

**What I was trying to do:** {what the user/agent was attempting}
**What happened instead:** {what actually happened}
**My rating:** {0-10} — {one sentence on why it wasn't a 10}

## Steps to reproduce
1. {step}

## Raw output

{paste the actual error or unexpected output here}


## What would make this a 10
{one sentence: what gstack should have done differently}

**Date:** {YYYY-MM-DD} | **Version:** {gstack version} | **Skill:** /{skill}

Slug: lowercase, hyphens, max 60 chars (e.g. browse-js-no-await). Skip if file already exists. Max 3 reports per session. File inline and continue — don't stop the workflow. Tell user: "Filed gstack field report: {title}"

Completion Status Protocol

When completing a skill workflow, report status using one of:

  • DONE — All steps completed successfully. Evidence provided for each claim.
  • DONE_WITH_CONCERNS — Completed, but with issues the user should know about. List each concern.
  • BLOCKED — Cannot proceed. State what is blocking and what was tried.
  • NEEDS_CONTEXT — Missing information required to continue. State exactly what you need.

Escalation

It is always OK to stop and say "this is too hard for me" or "I'm not confident in this result."

Bad work is worse than no work. You will not be penalized for escalating.

  • If you have attempted a task 3 times without success, STOP and escalate.
  • If you are uncertain about a security-sensitive change, STOP and escalate.
  • If the scope of work exceeds what you can verify, STOP and escalate.

Escalation format:

STATUS: BLOCKED | NEEDS_CONTEXT
REASON: [1-2 sentences]
ATTEMPTED: [what you tried]
RECOMMENDATION: [what the user should do next]

Step 0: Detect base branch

Determine which branch this PR targets. Use the result as "the base branch" in all subsequent steps.

  1. Check if a PR already exists for this branch: gh pr view --json baseRefName -q .baseRefName If this succeeds, use the printed branch name as the base branch.

  2. If no PR exists (command fails), detect the repo's default branch: gh repo view --json defaultBranchRef -q .defaultBranchRef.name

  3. If both commands fail, fall back to main.

Print the detected base branch name. In every subsequent git diff, git log, git fetch, git merge, and gh pr create command, substitute the detected branch name wherever the instructions say "the base branch."


Ship: Fully Automated Ship Workflow

You are running the /ship workflow. This is a non-interactive, fully automated workflow. Do NOT ask for confirmation at any step. The user said /ship which means DO IT. Run straight through and output the PR URL at the end.

Only stop for:

  • On the base branch (abort)
  • Merge conflicts that can't be auto-resolved (stop, show conflicts)
  • Test failures (stop, show failures)
  • Pre-landing review finds ASK items that need user judgment
  • MINOR or MAJOR version bump needed (ask — see Step 4)
  • Greptile review comments that need user decision (complex fixes, false positives)
  • TODOS.md missing and user wants to create one (ask — see Step 5.5)
  • TODOS.md disorganized and user wants to reorganize (ask — see Step 5.5)

Never stop for:

  • Uncommitted changes (always include them)
  • Version bump choice (auto-pick MICRO or PATCH — see Step 4)
  • CHANGELOG content (auto-generate from diff)
  • Commit message approval (auto-commit)
  • Multi-file changesets (auto-split into bisectable commits)
  • TODOS.md completed-item detection (auto-mark)
  • Auto-fixable review findings (dead code, N+1, stale comments — fixed automatically)
  • Test coverage gaps (auto-generate and commit, or flag in PR body)

Step 1: Pre-flight

  1. Check the current branch. If on the base branch or the repo's default branch, abort: "You're on the base branch. Ship from a feature branch."

  2. Run git status (never use -uall). Uncommitted changes are always included — no need to ask.

  3. Run git diff <base>...HEAD --stat and git log <base>..HEAD --oneline to understand what's being shipped.

  4. Check review readiness:

Review Readiness Dashboard

After completing the review, read the review log and config to display the dashboard.

eval $(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-slug 2>/dev/null)
cat ~/.gstack/projects/$SLUG/$BRANCH-reviews.jsonl 2>/dev/null || echo "NO_REVIEWS"
echo "---CONFIG---"
~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-config get skip_eng_review 2>/dev/null || echo "false"

Parse the output. Find the most recent entry for each skill (plan-ceo-review, plan-eng-review, plan-design-review, design-review-lite). Ignore entries with timestamps older than 7 days. For Design Review, show whichever is more recent between plan-design-review (full visual audit) and design-review-lite (code-level check). Append "(FULL)" or "(LITE)" to the status to distinguish. Display:

+====================================================================+
|                    REVIEW READINESS DASHBOARD                       |
+====================================================================+
| Review          | Runs | Last Run            | Status    | Required |
|-----------------|------|---------------------|-----------|----------|
| Eng Review      |  1   | 2026-03-16 15:00    | CLEAR     | YES      |
| CEO Review      |  0   | —                   | —         | no       |
| Design Review   |  0   | —                   | —         | no       |
+--------------------------------------------------------------------+
| VERDICT: CLEARED — Eng Review passed                                |
+====================================================================+

Review tiers:

  • Eng Review (required by default): The only review that gates shipping. Covers architecture, code quality, tests, performance. Can be disabled globally with `gstack-config set skip_eng_review true` (the "don't bother me" setting).
  • CEO Review (optional): Use your judgment. Recommend it for big product/business changes, new user-facing features, or scope decisions. Skip for bug fixes, refactors, infra, and cleanup.
  • Design Review (optional): Use your judgment. Recommend it for UI/UX changes. Skip for backend-only, infra, or prompt-only changes.

Verdict logic:

  • CLEARED: Eng Review has >= 1 entry within 7 days with status "clean" (or `skip_eng_review` is `true`)
  • NOT CLEARED: Eng Review missing, stale (>7 days), or has open issues
  • CEO and Design reviews are shown for context but never block shipping
  • If `skip_eng_review` config is `true`, Eng Review shows "SKIPPED (global)" and verdict is CLEARED

If the Eng Review is NOT "CLEAR":

  1. Check for a prior override on this branch:

    eval $(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-slug 2>/dev/null)
    grep '"skill":"ship-review-override"' ~/.gstack/projects/$SLUG/$BRANCH-reviews.jsonl 2>/dev/null || echo "NO_OVERRIDE"
    

    If an override exists, display the dashboard and note "Review gate previously accepted — continuing." Do NOT ask again.

  2. If no override exists, use AskUserQuestion:

    • Show that Eng Review is missing or has open issues
    • RECOMMENDATION: Choose C if the change is obviously trivial (< 20 lines, typo fix, config-only); Choose B for larger changes
    • Options: A) Ship anyway B) Abort — run /plan-eng-review first C) Change is too small to need eng review
    • If CEO Review is missing, mention as informational ("CEO Review not run — recommended for product changes") but do NOT block
    • For Design Review: run eval $(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-diff-scope <base> 2>/dev/null). If SCOPE_FRONTEND=true and no design review (plan-design-review or design-review-lite) exists in the dashboard, mention: "Design Review not run — this PR changes frontend code. The lite design check will run automatically in Step 3.5, but consider running /design-review for a full visual audit post-implementation." Still never block.
  3. If the user chooses A or C, persist the decision so future /ship runs on this branch skip the gate:

    eval $(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-slug 2>/dev/null)
    echo '{"skill":"ship-review-override","timestamp":"'"$(date -u +%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%SZ)"'","decision":"USER_CHOICE"}' >> ~/.gstack/projects/$SLUG/$BRANCH-reviews.jsonl
    

    Substitute USER_CHOICE with "ship_anyway" or "not_relevant".


Step 2: Merge the base branch (BEFORE tests)

Fetch and merge the base branch into the feature branch so tests run against the merged state:

git fetch origin <base> && git merge origin/<base> --no-edit

If there are merge conflicts: Try to auto-resolve if they are simple (VERSION, schema.rb, CHANGELOG ordering). If conflicts are complex or ambiguous, STOP and show them.

If already up to date: Continue silently.


Step 2.5: Test Framework Bootstrap

Test Framework Bootstrap

Detect existing test framework and project runtime:

# Detect project runtime
[ -f Gemfile ] && echo "RUNTIME:ruby"
[ -f package.json ] && echo "RUNTIME:node"
[ -f requirements.txt ] || [ -f pyproject.toml ] && echo "RUNTIME:python"
[ -f go.mod ] && echo "RUNTIME:go"
[ -f Cargo.toml ] && echo "RUNTIME:rust"
[ -f composer.json ] && echo "RUNTIME:php"
[ -f mix.exs ] && echo "RUNTIME:elixir"
# Detect sub-frameworks
[ -f Gemfile ] && grep -q "rails" Gemfile 2>/dev/null && echo "FRAMEWORK:rails"
[ -f package.json ] && grep -q '"next"' package.json 2>/dev/null && echo "FRAMEWORK:nextjs"
# Check for existing test infrastructure
ls jest.config.* vitest.config.* playwright.config.* .rspec pytest.ini pyproject.toml phpunit.xml 2>/dev/null
ls -d test/ tests/ spec/ __tests__/ cypress/ e2e/ 2>/dev/null
# Check opt-out marker
[ -f .gstack/no-test-bootstrap ] && echo "BOOTSTRAP_DECLINED"

If test framework detected (config files or test directories found): Print "Test framework detected: {name} ({N} existing tests). Skipping bootstrap." Read 2-3 existing test files to learn conventions (naming, imports, assertion style, setup patterns). Store conventions as prose context for use in Phase 8e.5 or Step 3.4. Skip the rest of bootstrap.

If BOOTSTRAP_DECLINED appears: Print "Test bootstrap previously declined — skipping." Skip the rest of bootstrap.

If NO runtime detected (no config files found): Use AskUserQuestion: "I couldn't detect your project's language. What runtime are you using?" Options: A) Node.js/TypeScript B) Ruby/Rails C) Python D) Go E) Rust F) PHP G) Elixir H) This project doesn't need tests. If user picks H → write .gstack/no-test-bootstrap and continue without tests.

If runtime detected but no test framework — bootstrap:

B2. Research best practices

Use WebSearch to find current best practices for the detected runtime:

  • "[runtime] best test framework 2025 2026"
  • "[framework A] vs [framework B] comparison"

If WebSearch is unavailable, use this built-in knowledge table:

RuntimePrimary recommendationAlternative
Ruby/Railsminitest + fixtures + capybararspec + factory_bot + shoulda-matchers
Node.jsvitest + @testing-libraryjest + @testing-library
Next.jsvitest + @testing-library/react + playwrightjest + cypress
Pythonpytest + pytest-covunittest
Gostdlib testing + testifystdlib only
Rustcargo test (built-in) + mockall
PHPphpunit + mockerypest
ElixirExUnit (built-in) + ex_machina

B3. Framework selection

Use AskUserQuestion: "I detected this is a [Runtime/Framework] project with no test framework. I researched current best practices. Here are the options: A) [Primary] — [rationale]. Includes: [packages]. Supports: unit, integration, smoke, e2e B) [Alternative] — [rationale]. Includes: [packages] C) Skip — don't set up testing right now RECOMMENDATION: Choose A because [reason based on project context]"

If user picks C → write .gstack/no-test-bootstrap. Tell user: "If you change your mind later, delete .gstack/no-test-bootstrap and re-run." Continue without tests.

If multiple runtimes detected (monorepo) → ask which runtime to set up first, with option to do both sequentially.

B4. Install and configure

  1. Install the chosen packages (npm/bun/gem/pip/etc.)
  2. Create minimal config file
  3. Create directory structure (test/, spec/, etc.)
  4. Create one example test matching the project's code to verify setup works

If package installation fails → debug once. If still failing → revert with git checkout -- package.json package-lock.json (or equivalent for the runtime). Warn user and continue without tests.

B4.5. First real tests

Generate 3-5 real tests for existing code:

  1. Find recently changed files: git log --since=30.days --name-only --format="" | sort | uniq -c | sort -rn | head -10
  2. Prioritize by risk: Error handlers > business logic with conditionals > API endpoints > pure functions
  3. For each file: Write one test that tests real behavior with meaningful assertions. Never expect(x).toBeDefined() — test what the code DOES.
  4. Run each test. Passes → keep. Fails → fix once. Still fails → delete silently.
  5. Generate at least 1 test, cap at 5.

Never import secrets, API keys, or credentials in test files. Use environment variables or test fixtures.

B5. Verify

# Run the full test suite to confirm everything works
{detected test command}

If tests fail → debug once. If still failing → revert all bootstrap changes and warn user.

B5.5. CI/CD pipeline

# Check CI provider
ls -d .github/ 2>/dev/null && echo "CI:github"
ls .gitlab-ci.yml .circleci/ bitrise.yml 2>/dev/null

If .github/ exists (or no CI detected — default to GitHub Actions): Create .github/workflows/test.yml with:

  • runs-on: ubuntu-latest
  • Appropriate setup action for the runtime (setup-node, setup-ruby, setup-python, etc.)
  • The same test command verified in B5
  • Trigger: push + pull_request

If non-GitHub CI detected → skip CI generation with note: "Detected {provider} — CI pipeline generation supports GitHub Actions only. Add test step to your existing pipeline manually."

B6. Create TESTING.md

First check: If TESTING.md already exists → read it and update/append rather than overwriting. Never destroy existing content.

Write TESTING.md with:

  • Philosophy: "100% test coverage is the key to great vibe coding. Tests let you move fast, trust your instincts, and ship with confidence — without them, vibe coding is just yolo coding. With tests, it's a superpower."
  • Framework name and version
  • How to run tests (the verified command from B5)
  • Test layers: Unit tests (what, where, when), Integration tests, Smoke tests, E2E tests
  • Conventions: file naming, assertion style, setup/teardown patterns

B7. Update CLAUDE.md

First check: If CLAUDE.md already has a ## Testing section → skip. Don't duplicate.

Append a ## Testing section:

  • Run command and test directory
  • Reference to TESTING.md
  • Test expectations:
    • 100% test coverage is the goal — tests make vibe coding safe
    • When writing new functions, write a corresponding test
    • When fixing a bug, write a regression test
    • When adding error handling, write a test that triggers the error
    • When adding a conditional (if/else, switch), write tests for BOTH paths
    • Never commit code that makes existing tests fail

B8. Commit

git status --porcelain

Only commit if there are changes. Stage all bootstrap files (config, test directory, TESTING.md, CLAUDE.md, .github/workflows/test.yml if created): git commit -m "chore: bootstrap test framework ({framework name})"



Step 3: Run tests (on merged code)

Do NOT run RAILS_ENV=test bin/rails db:migratebin/test-lane already calls db:test:prepare internally, which loads the schema into the correct lane database. Running bare test migrations without INSTANCE hits an orphan DB and corrupts structure.sql.

Run both test suites in parallel:

bin/test-lane 2>&1 | tee /tmp/ship_tests.txt &
npm run test 2>&1 | tee /tmp/ship_vitest.txt &
wait

After both complete, read the output files and check pass/fail.

If any test fails: Show the failures and STOP. Do not proceed.

If all pass: Continue silently — just note the counts briefly.


Step 3.25: Eval Suites (conditional)

Evals are mandatory when prompt-related files change. Skip this step entirely if no prompt files are in the diff.

1. Check if the diff touches prompt-related files:

git diff origin/<base> --name-only

Match against these patterns (from CLAUDE.md):

  • app/services/*_prompt_builder.rb
  • app/services/*_generation_service.rb, *_writer_service.rb, *_designer_service.rb
  • app/services/*_evaluator.rb, *_scorer.rb, *_classifier_service.rb, *_analyzer.rb
  • app/services/concerns/*voice*.rb, *writing*.rb, *prompt*.rb, *token*.rb
  • app/services/chat_tools/*.rb, app/services/x_thread_tools/*.rb
  • config/system_prompts/*.txt
  • test/evals/**/* (eval infrastructure changes affect all suites)

If no matches: Print "No prompt-related files changed — skipping evals." and continue to Step 3.5.

2. Identify affected eval suites:

Each eval runner (test/evals/*_eval_runner.rb) declares PROMPT_SOURCE_FILES listing which source files affect it. Grep these to find which suites match the changed files:

grep -l "changed_file_basename" test/evals/*_eval_runner.rb

Map runner → test file: post_generation_eval_runner.rbpost_generation_eval_test.rb.

Shortened here. Read the whole file on GitHub.

Signals

GitHub stars
34
Forks
6
Last commit
Sep 2026
Advanced
Catalog kind
skill
Gateway key
ship-willnigri
Source
github.com/willnigri/agentic-tool-optimization