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 evgenii-studitskikh/Claude-Code-SaaS-Studio --skill launch-checklistgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/evgenii-studitskikh/Claude-Code-SaaS-StudioWrote 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/evgenii-studitskikh/claude-code-saas-studio/launch-checklist)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/evgenii-studitskikh/claude-code-saas-studio/launch-checklist"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/evgenii-studitskikh/claude-code-saas-studio/launch-checklist.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00997 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00023 | $0.00498 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00009 | $0.00199 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00005 | $0.00100 |
Grade A, and why
launch-checklist 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 7d 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 — 25 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Execute a comprehensive pre-launch gate check against the canonical checklist, surfacing every blocking issue that must be resolved before the product goes live. Non-autonomous: presents a full findings report; nothing is auto-fixed — the user decides how to address each item.
Phases
- Load checklist template — read
.claude/templates/launch-checklist.mdto get the canonical item list. If the template is missing, fall back to the built-in checklist defined in this skill. Check whether a previous run exists atdocs/specs/launch-checklist.mdand note any items already marked PASS. - Security: secrets check — run
git log --all --full-history -- '.env' '.env.*'and grep the working tree for patterns matching real API keys (sk_live_,sk_test_,eyJ,-----BEGIN). Verify.gitignorecovers.env,.env.local, and.env.*.local. Any real secret found in version control is an immediate BLOCK. - Security: RLS verification — read all migration files under
supabase/migrations/and all Supabase query code underlib/andapp/. Confirm that every tenant-scoped table hasENABLE ROW LEVEL SECURITYand at least one policy. Flag any table that is missing RLS as a BLOCK unless it is explicitly documented as public or service-role-only. - Billing: Stripe live-mode check — verify that the production environment's
STRIPE_SECRET_KEYstarts withsk_live_(check.env.examplenotes or ask the user to confirm). Verify that the Stripe webhook endpoint is registered for the production URL with the correct event types. Verify thatSTRIPE_WEBHOOK_SECRETis set for production. Flag test-mode keys in production as a BLOCK. - Operational readiness — check for: (a) an error monitoring integration (Sentry, Axiom, or equivalent — look for SDK imports in
lib/orapp/), (b) the existence of/privacyand/termsroutes or static pages (legal stubs), (c) a working health-check endpoint or Vercel deployment health, and (d) the CI workflow in.github/workflows/is present and passing. Mark each as PASS, WARNING, or BLOCK. - Security audit gate (BLOCKING) — read the
## Verdictsection ofdocs/specs/security-audit.md. Apply the following logic: (a) if the file is missing → BLOCK and instruct the user to run/security-audit; (b) if the## Verdictsection readsBLOCK(open High/Critical findings) → BLOCK and instruct the user to resolve all High/Critical findings listed there before proceeding; (c) if the## Verdictsection readsPASS→ this gate is satisfied. - Tests green gate (BLOCKING) — apply the following logic: (a) if no
vitest.config.tsexists in the project root → BLOCK and instruct the user to run/test-setupto scaffold the test suite before launch; (b) ifvitest.config.tsexists, run the project'snpm testscript (Vitest unit/integration) and, if a Playwright config exists,npx playwright test; if either command exits non-zero → BLOCK and instruct the user to fix failures and run/write-testsfor any files lacking coverage. - Write report and verdict — fill
docs/specs/launch-checklist.mdwith each item's status and a one-line note. Output a final verdict: PASS (all items PASS or WARNING only) or BLOCK (one or more BLOCK items remain, including the security audit gate or the tests green gate). Under BLOCK, list the blocking items in priority order with remediation steps — security audit failures and test suite failures must appear first. Show the report for approval before writing the file. Honor the review intensity: underfull, walk through each checklist section for sign-off; underlean, get a single confirmation before writing the report; undersolo, proceed and summarize after.
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.
- 7d ago First seen · 25 lines · 45 tokens per session scan A 37802f4b0491
launch-checklist is a skill published in the GitHub repository evgenii-studitskikh/Claude-Code-SaaS-Studio (1 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 45 tokens to every session and 997 once invoked, about $0.0002 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.
Other skills, from other repositories
consent
A consent manager for allowing or withdrawing permission to process learning and behavior data. Consent means a person actively agrees to this data use.
compliance-check
Validate codebase against code-level compliance signals for regulatory frameworks (FedRAMP, FIPS, OWASP, SOC 2). Scoped to source code analysis only — not a compliance certification.
themis
A code-based privacy policy drafting workflow. It checks where a project collects, stores, sends, or deletes personal information and uses only findings supported by file-and-line evidence.
local-legal-seo-audit
Audit and improve local SEO for law firms, attorneys, forensic experts and legal/professional services sites with local presence, focusing on GBP, directories, E-E-A-T and practice/location pages.
EU AI Act High-Risk Obligations
PASS/FAIL/N/A checklist for the high-risk AI obligations under Articles 8-15 of the EU AI Act, plus the quality management system, conformity assessment, registration, post-market monitoring, and incident reporting.
EU AI Act Risk Classification
Decision tree for classifying an AI system into the EU AI Act risk tier (unacceptable/high/limited/minimal) and identifying the actor role (provider/deployer/importer/distributor).