kiro-rails: Command for Claude Code

.claude/commands/review-cicd-pipeline.md

review-cicd-pipeline is a command for Claude Code from sourjya/kiro-rails. It costs 29 tokens per session (2,840 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

An audit of continuous integration and continuous delivery pipelines—the automated steps that build, test, and deploy software. It examines pipeline security, testing gates, credentials, dependencies, and deployment evidence.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it to review workflow files, permissions, action versions, triggers, caches, logs, release artifacts, and production deployment steps.
Why use it?
It helps expose unsafe automation, such as leaked secrets, changeable third-party actions, untested deployments, dangerous triggers, or artifacts that cannot be verified.

Command for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: installed under .claude/.

This is sourjya/kiro-rails's own configuration. It tells Claude Code how to work on kiro-rails itself, so it is not a mod to install elsewhere. Copy it as a starting point and replace the rules that are about this project. Everything kiro-rails configures →

Reuse

Borrowing it

Nothing to install: this file belongs to sourjya/kiro-rails. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.

Copy the file
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/sourjya/kiro-rails/main/.claude/commands/review-cicd-pipeline.md
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/sourjya/kiro-rails

Made for: Claude Code.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for review-cicd-pipeline

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/sourjya/kiro-rails/review-cicd-pipeline/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/commands/sourjya/kiro-rails/review-cicd-pipeline)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/sourjya/kiro-rails/review-cicd-pipeline"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/sourjya/kiro-rails/review-cicd-pipeline/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for review-cicd-pipeline

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/commands/sourjya/kiro-rails/review-cicd-pipeline"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/commands/sourjya/kiro-rails/review-cicd-pipeline.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 29 Only the description is in the session, so the agent can decide to use it. The body loads when it is invoked.
When invoked 2,840 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 1 finding. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
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 5.1 $0.00029 $0.02840
Opus 5 $0.00015 $0.01420
Sonnet 5 $0.00006 $0.00568
Haiku 4.5 $0.00003 $0.00284

Measured 11d ago against content hash 1c6ab35baa37, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-11, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

review-cicd-pipeline scanned grade A with 1 finding 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 11d 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.

Unrestricted tool accesslowExcessive agency

A wildcard tool grant or "run any command" leaves no least-privilege boundary at all.

1. **Workflow and action security.** Workflow files with overly permissive `permissions` blocks (especially `contents: write`, `id-token: write`, or top-level `write-all`). Actions referenced by mutable tag (`@v3`) inste

Downgraded: this mod is about security review, or the phrase is quoted, so it is likely naming the pattern rather than instructing it.

.claude/commands/review-cicd-pipeline.md · 178 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 178 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Before scanning, read docs/decisions/ ADRs if they exist. Use documented deployment decisions (intentional gating strategy, accepted pipeline trade-offs) to distinguish intentional configuration from accidental gaps.

Act as a principal-level DevOps and platform security engineer performing a comprehensive CI/CD pipeline audit.

Your mission is not to verify that pipelines run. It is to determine whether the CI/CD layer is secure against supply chain attacks, resistant to credential leakage, capable of producing verifiable artifacts, and structured so that a compromised dependency, a misconfigured trigger, or a stale cache cannot silently degrade production. A pipeline that deploys successfully but cannot prove what it deployed is a liability.


Review Objectives

Identify:

  1. Workflow and action security. Workflow files with overly permissive permissions blocks (especially contents: write, id-token: write, or top-level write-all). Actions referenced by mutable tag (@v3) instead of pinned SHA. Dangerous trigger configurations: pull_request_target with checkout of PR head, workflow_dispatch without input validation, issue_comment triggers that execute arbitrary code. Expression injection via ${{ github.event.*.body }} or similar unsanitized context interpolation in run: steps. Third-party actions from unverified publishers or with low adoption. Composite actions that escalate permissions beyond what the calling workflow grants.

  2. OIDC trust scoping and identity federation. OIDC token requests without audience restriction or with overly broad subject claims. AWS AssumeRoleWithWebIdentity trust policies that accept any branch, any repo, or any workflow. Missing condition keys (sub, aud, repo, ref, environment) in IAM trust policy conditions. Federated identity configurations that allow cross-repository or cross-organization token exchange. OIDC tokens requested in workflows that do not need cloud access.

  3. Secret injection hygiene. Secrets passed as environment variables to steps that do not need them. Secrets interpolated into shell commands where they could appear in process listings or error output. Missing use of AWS Secrets Manager or Parameter Store for runtime secrets - secrets baked into build artifacts or container images instead. Secrets accessible to pull request workflows from forks. Secret rotation not enforced or documented. Secrets referenced by name but never defined in the repository or organization settings.

  4. Deployment artifact integrity and reproducibility. Missing artifact signing (Sigstore, cosign, AWS Signer). No Software Bill of Materials (SBOM) generation for container images or deployment packages. Build processes that are not hermetic - output depends on network fetches, floating tags, or mutable base images at build time. No content-addressable artifact storage (artifacts identified by name or timestamp rather than digest). SLSA provenance not generated or not verified at deployment time. Container images built from :latest or unpinned base images. Lambda deployment packages without integrity verification.

  5. Pipeline gating strategies. Missing or bypassable quality gates: tests, linting, security scans, or coverage thresholds that do not block merge. Required status checks not configured as branch protection rules. Manual approval gates missing for production deployments. Progressive delivery not implemented where blast radius warrants it (canary, blue-green, feature flags). Environment protection rules not configured or configured without required reviewers. Deployment pipelines that skip staging or pre-production validation.

  6. Rollback automation. No automated rollback mechanism on deployment failure. Health checks that do not cover application-level readiness (only TCP/HTTP 200, not business logic). Missing rollback runbook or rollback procedure not tested. CloudFormation or CDK stacks without rollback configuration or with DisableRollback: true. ECS or Lambda deployments without automatic rollback on alarm. No mechanism to promote a previous known-good artifact without rebuilding.

Read the full file on GitHub · 178 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. 11d ago First seen · 178 lines · 29 tokens per session scan A 1c6ab35baa37

Subscribe to this mod's changes

review-cicd-pipeline is a command published in the GitHub repository sourjya/kiro-rails (9 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 29 tokens to every session and 2,840 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (unrestricted tool access). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.