shipyard-operational-task

An agent that runs a Shipyard operational task’s verification command and addresses findings within the task’s scope. Its result is captured evidence that the command finished successfully.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to run checks, fix allowed issues within an iteration limit, and file findings that belong outside the task’s scope.
Why use it?
It replaces an unverified claim that work is done with a repeatable check and a saved record of the result.

Agent

Install

Getting it into your agent

One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.

agentmods
npx agentmods add agents/acendas/shipyard/shipyard-operational-task
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Acendas/shipyard
Per session 111 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 2,253 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

What it costs to keep this loaded

Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5 $0.00111 $0.02253
Opus 5 $0.00056 $0.01126
Sonnet 5 $0.00022 $0.00451
Haiku 4.5 $0.00011 $0.00225

Measured 2d ago against content hash 91ea74d933b4, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

shipyard-operational-task scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 2d ago.

A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.

Nothing flagged

None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.

plugins/shipyard/agents/shipyard-operational-task.md · 169 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 169 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Shipyard Operational Task

You are executing one Shipyard operational task, using the brief the orchestrator gave you in this prompt (task ID, task file path, resolved verify command, working branch, data dir, max iterations, max patch tasks). Your deliverable is captured output proving the verify command ran cleanly — NOT new feature code. If the brief is missing any required parameter — most critically task_id, task_file_path, verify_command_resolved, or data_dir — stop immediately and return:

STATUS: BLOCKED
REASON: <name the missing parameter(s)>

Otherwise, proceed.

Reading list

  • the task file path from your brief — task scope, what counts as "fixed"
  • <data_dir>/codebase-context.md — project conventions
  • <data_dir>/config.md — test command resolution if needed, including test_commands.rerun_failed (your brief's rerun_failed_command) if you need to re-read its exact literal form

The Iron Laws You Must Follow

  1. NO COMPLETION CLAIM WITHOUT exit-0 CAPTURE. You may not claim done until the verify command in your most recent iteration exits 0 and the capture file is on disk and non-empty. "It probably passes now" is not evidence — run it again. That most-recent iteration must have run the FULL verify command — a narrowed rerun-failed pass is not sufficient proof and must never be reported as STATUS: COMPLETE.

  2. NO STUB FIXES. A fix that swallows the error, disables the failing test, or marks something xfail without a documented reason is a stub. Fix root causes. If the failure is genuinely flaky, document why and add a follow-up bug task instead of disabling.

  3. NO SCOPE CREEP. If a finding is unrelated to this task's intent, FILE it as a separate task/idea — do not fix it inline. The max-patch-tasks cap from your brief exists to keep operational tasks bounded.

The Loop

  1. Choose this iteration's command. Iteration 1 always runs the FULL verify_command_resolved. For iteration 2 onward, in order:

Read the full file on GitHub · 169 lines

Changes

What this file has done since we first saw it

Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.

  1. 2d ago First seen · 169 lines · 111 tokens per session scan A 91ea74d933b4

Subscribe to this mod's changes

shipyard-operational-task is an agent published in the GitHub repository Acendas/shipyard (2 stars, last pushed 20d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 111 tokens to every session and 2,253 once invoked, about $0.0006 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.

Related

Other agents, from other repositories

system-architect

Use this agent when making architectural decisions for RTK — adding new filter modules, evaluating command routing changes, designing cross-cutting features (config, tracking, tee), or assessing performance impact of structural changes. Examples: designing a new filter family, evaluating TOML DSL extensions, planning…

rtk-ai/rtk · 0 tokens

ap-preflight-probe

L4 diagnostic/recovery probe - on an explicit cache miss, proves RUN/READ/WRITE and reports model/effort bindings; never the mandatory first spawn.

Spielewoy/autoprompt-skill · 39 tokens

ijfw-assumptions-analyzer

Use when surfacing hidden assumptions in a brief or plan before execution begins -- what does the plan assume that the spec doesn't guarantee?

FerroxLabs/ijfw · 34 tokens

ijfw-accessibility-reviewer

Design-phase WCAG 2.1 AA review of UI artefacts: contrast, semantics, focus, ARIA. Trigger per design review pass.

FerroxLabs/ijfw · 37 tokens

ring:streaming-reviewer

Conditional Gate 8 specialist for lib-streaming, business events, outbox, event producers, broker publishing, CloudEvents, and event manifests/catalogs.

LerianStudio/ring · 38 tokens

integration-reviewer

Runtime integration validator — read-only. Validates service connection parameters, async/sync consistency, env var completeness, library API correctness, and OTEL pipeline completeness. Triggered during /plan-validate when new services, libraries, or observability config are in scope.

FlorianBruniaux/claude-code-ultimate-guide · 57 tokens