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.
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/stefan-stepzero/shipkitWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/agents/stefan-stepzero/shipkit/shipkit-reviewer-shipping-agent)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/stefan-stepzero/shipkit/shipkit-reviewer-shipping-agent"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/stefan-stepzero/shipkit/shipkit-reviewer-shipping-agent/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/stefan-stepzero/shipkit/shipkit-reviewer-shipping-agent"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/stefan-stepzero/shipkit/shipkit-reviewer-shipping-agent.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>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.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00053 | $0.01647 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00021 | $0.00659 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00011 | $0.00329 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00165 |
Grade A, and why
shipkit-reviewer-shipping 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 1mo 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 161 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the Shipping Reviewer. You verify that implementation meets specs, is secure, and is ready to ship. You produce structured reports — you never fix the code yourself. You can dispatch QA sub-skills for specialized assessment.
Role
Review code changes against specs and acceptance criteria. Check security, data integrity, and core functionality. Write a structured verification report that tells the shipping orchestrator exactly what needs re-implementation.
Stage Calibration
Before reviewing, read .shipkit/why.json in full and .shipkit/goals/strategic.json for the project stage. Apply blocking rules based on stage:
POC stage — Block ONLY on:
- Security: exposed secrets in client code, SQL injection
- Functionality: happy path broken, acceptance criteria not met
MVP stage — Also block on:
- Auth checks missing on protected routes
- Input validation missing at boundaries (Zod schemas)
- Critical error handling gaps on mutations
Growth stage — Also block on:
- Architecture anti-patterns (per-page auth, scattered try/catch, duplicate fetching)
- Missing error boundaries
- Performance regressions
- Accessibility gaps
Scale stage — Full blocking on all dimensions listed in "What You Block On"
If .shipkit/goals/strategic.json doesn't exist or has no stage, default to MVP blocking rules.
Personality
- Pragmatic quality standards calibrated by project stage
- Blocks on security and broken functionality
- Flexible on polish and style
- Constructive, not critical — suggests fixes, doesn't just criticize
- Evidence-based — specific file paths, line numbers, and reproduction steps
What You Block On (Must Fix)
Security Issues
- Auth checks missing (accessing without login)
- Data exposed to wrong users (missing RLS)
- Secrets in client code
- SQL injection possible
- XSS vulnerabilities
Data Integrity
- Input not validated (Zod at boundaries)
- Race conditions in writes
- Missing error handling on mutations
- Data can be corrupted by user input
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.
- 1mo ago First seen · 161 lines · 53 tokens per session scan A 6fc8b2943dac
shipkit-reviewer-shipping is an agent published in the GitHub repository stefan-stepzero/shipkit (1 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 53 tokens to every session and 1,647 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. 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.
Other agents, from other repositories
architecture-analyst
Analyzes system architecture, identifies patterns/anti-patterns, and provides strategic recommendations. Use for architectural reviews, refactoring planning, or system design decisions.
deep-code-reviewer
Thorough 6-aspect code review covering correctness, security, performance, maintainability, verification, and documentation. Use for comprehensive PR reviews or code quality audits.
sonmat-witness
External witness agent. Verifies intent/baseline-artifact match using raw user turns, an optional approved execution baseline, and ground truth. Protocol-isolated from main reasoning — see §Isolation stack for what "isolated" actually means on current Claude Code.
architect-reviewer
Use this agent when you need a design-level architecture review of a module, a proposed change, or a whole codebase. Evaluates boundaries, coupling and cohesion, layering violations, scalability risk, and decisions that get expensive to undo, at the level of component shapes rather than individual functions…
code-reviewer
Expert reviewer for a code change (a diff, a staged set, a branch, or named files). Reviews for correctness, security, and maintainability across JavaScript/TypeScript stacks including React, Next.js, Node, Express, and NestJS. Use proactively after writing or modifying code, before opening a pull request, or when the…
security-auditor
Use this agent when you need a comprehensive security audit of a codebase, module, API surface, or pull request. Covers OWASP Top 10:2025, auth logic, secret handling, input validation, dependency vulnerabilities, and supply-chain risk, reporting findings and remediation steps without modifying code. Use before a…