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.
npx skills add borhen68/SkillEngine --skill ci-cd-and-automationgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/borhen68/SkillEngineWrote 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/skills/borhen68/skillengine/ci-cd-and-automation)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/borhen68/skillengine/ci-cd-and-automation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/borhen68/skillengine/ci-cd-and-automation/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/skills/borhen68/skillengine/ci-cd-and-automation"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/borhen68/skillengine/ci-cd-and-automation.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 | $0.00045 | $0.02971 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.01188 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00594 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00297 |
Grade A, and why
ci-cd-and-automation 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 — 415 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
CI/CD and Automation
Overview
Every engineering team believes they have quality gates. The question is: are they enforced by humans (who forget, get busy, and make exceptions) or by machines (who never forget, never get tired, and never make exceptions)? CI/CD is the machine that enforces every other skill's standards — automatically, on every change, without mercy.
The CI/CD contract: No code reaches production without passing every gate: lint, type check, build, test, security scan. No exceptions. No "just this once." A pipeline that can be bypassed will be bypassed — usually by the very person who said "I know what I'm doing."
Real-world impact: DORA research shows that elite performers deploy 200x more frequently and recover from failures 2,600x faster than low performers. The difference isn't better engineers — it's automated pipelines that catch problems before they reach users. Shift Left isn't a buzzword; it's a cost equation: a bug caught in linting costs minutes, the same bug in production costs hours and reputation.
When to Use
- Setting up a new project's CI pipeline
- Adding or modifying automated checks
- Configuring deployment pipelines
- When a change should trigger automated verification
- Debugging CI failures
The Quality Gate Pipeline
Every change goes through these gates before merge:
Pull Request Opened
│
▼
┌─────────────────┐
│ LINT CHECK │ eslint, prettier
│ ↓ pass │
│ TYPE CHECK │ tsc --noEmit
│ ↓ pass │
│ UNIT TESTS │ jest/vitest
│ ↓ pass │
│ BUILD │ npm run build
│ ↓ pass │
│ INTEGRATION │ API/DB tests
│ ↓ pass │
│ E2E (optional) │ Playwright/Cypress
│ ↓ pass │
│ SECURITY AUDIT │ npm audit
│ ↓ pass │
│ BUNDLE SIZE │ bundlesize check
└─────────────────┘
│
▼
Ready for review
No gate can be skipped. If lint fails, fix lint — don't disable the rule. If a test fails, fix the code — don't skip the test.
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 · 415 lines · 45 tokens per session scan A fdbc0b4d61a3
ci-cd-and-automation is a skill published in the GitHub repository borhen68/SkillEngine (17 stars, last pushed 4mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 45 tokens to every session and 2,971 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
ci-cd-and-automation
Guidance for setting up continuous integration and delivery, where automated checks test and prepare software changes before release.
ci-cd-and-automation
Automates CI/CD pipeline setup. Use when setting up or modifying build and deployment pipelines. Use when you need to automate quality gates, configure test runners in CI, or establish deployment strategies.
ci-cd-pipelines
Automated quality gates from commit to production. Every merge to main is potentially shippable. No manual steps in the deployment path.
constraint-driven-development
A development method for writing a project's quality standards as a lasting, checkable contract. It can cover areas such as test coverage, security, performance, accessibility, and architecture.
code-review-and-quality
A code-review guide for checking changes across correctness, readability, architecture, security, and performance before they are merged.
doubt-driven-development
A development practice that puts an independent, fresh-context challenge in front of important coding decisions.