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 fmflurry/settings-opencode --skill shipgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/fmflurry/settings-opencodeWrote 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/fmflurry/settings-opencode/ship)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/fmflurry/settings-opencode/ship"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/fmflurry/settings-opencode/ship/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/fmflurry/settings-opencode/ship"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/fmflurry/settings-opencode/ship.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 | $0.00077 | $0.02762 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00031 | $0.01105 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00015 | $0.00552 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00276 |
Grade A, and why
ship 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 yesterday.
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 — 160 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Ship
/ship <goal> drives one goal from clarification to a merged PR (method per repo) on the base branch. The goal state lives
in .claude/state/goal.json. In Claude Code, the Stop hook keeps the session working until the PR is merged or the
goal escalates.
The goal text is $ARGUMENTS.
The ship loop
In autonomous mode the run is a loop, not a checklist. It repeats until the PR merges:
- Implement. Tests first, then code, through
tdd-guideandcoder. - Verify. Run the project checks yourself.
- Push and open the PR (draft).
- Thorough local review of the PR diff.
- CI. Wait for the required checks and the optional review status. Read the review threads.
- Merge with
agent-harness ship-merge. This is the only merge path. It checks hard facts. Its refusal is input to the loop, not the end of the run.
Any blocker (see Blockers) sends the run back to fix, then review again, then retry the merge.
The run ends only in one of two states: done (the PR is merged), or a genuine human-only blocker. A no-progress
iteration is also an escalation (see Stop conditions).
Config
Read .claude/agent-harness.json in the target repo before stage 1. All keys are optional:
base, requiredChecks, reviewStatus, reviewStatusCreator, verify, protectedPaths.
Defaults are in the "Autonomous mode" section of this repo's README.
Modes
| Mode | Flag | Clarify | Merge |
|---|---|---|---|
| Interactive | off | One AskUserQuestion round on load-bearing unknowns | Ask first, then run agent-harness ship-merge <pr> --confirmed |
| Autonomous | on (/autonomous on) |
Skipped. Assumptions are logged and pinned in the PR | agent-harness ship-merge <pr> (the flag gates it) |
Check the mode with agent-harness autonomy status. The rules behind both modes are in the autonomy rule
(.claude/rules/common/autonomy.md).
Stages
- Clarify. Ask one dependency-safe AskUserQuestion round, with a recommended option per question.
In autonomous mode skip it and log each assumption with
show-your-work. - Set the goal.
agent-harness goal set "$ARGUMENTS" <criteria...>. Criteria: PR merged to the base branch, everyrequiredChecksentry green, theverifycommands green, thereviewStatusstatus successful on the head (when configured), zero open review threads. 2b. Check open PRs. Follow open-pr-check.md before planning or implementing. Record each overlapping PR's decision; aWait or canceloutcome escalates. - Plan. Dispatch the
planneragent. Keep the plan in the log, not in chat. - Branch or worktree. The branch MUST follow the branch convention
<type>/<scope>-<short-description>from the git-workflow skill (for examplefix/ship-branch-naming);git-specialistnames it. See lifecycle step 4 for the commands. Never remove a worktree; see the worktree destruction rule (.claude/rules/common/worktree-destruction-safety.md). - Implement.
tdd-guidewrites the failing tests, thencoderimplements. Both get a 6-field brief per the brief contract rule. Commits go throughgit-specialist. - Verify. Run the verification yourself, not through a subagent's self-report. Commands are in lifecycle.md.
- Draft the PR. Dispatch
git-specialistto push the branch and open a draft PR with the body sections## Content,## QA tests,## Locked decisions,## Non-blocking follow-ups. Put every assumption under## Locked decisions. Thenagent-harness goal pr <n>. - Thorough review (local). Still draft. Dispatch in one message, so they run in parallel, each on
git diff <base>...HEAD:code-reviewer(correctness),security-reviewer(auth, secrets, input, CI, permissions), and the stack cop when it applies:angular-copfor Angular/TS,dotnet-copfor .NET.database-reviewerwhen SQL changed. Verify each finding against the code and drop the ones you cannot confirm. Every confirmed CRITICAL and HIGH finding is a blocker: fix it, push throughgit-specialist, runagent-harness goal sha <sha>, then review again on the new diff. There is no round cap; the no-progress rule below decides when to stop. When the review ends, post one summary PR comment in the format of review-format.md. It is an audit trail for a human. It is not a GitHub status, andship-mergedoes not read it. - Mark ready.
gh pr ready <n>.ship-mergerefuses drafts and never marks a PR ready, so this step is required. - Wait for CI.
gh pr checks <n> --watch. On a failed check, use theloop-on-ciskill, which routes failures through thefix-ciskill. When the repo setsreviewStatus, also check that status on the head. On a failure, fix the cause, push throughgit-specialist, thenagent-harness goal sha <sha>. Runagent-harness goal bumpbefore each fix round. - Comments. Run the
get-pr-commentsskill to list open threads. Address each one with a fix or a reply that says why not, then resolve the threads you addressed. See lifecycle step 11. - Merge. Autonomous mode:
agent-harness ship-merge <pr>. Interactive mode: add--confirmedafter the user says yes. The merge method is chosen with--method squash|rebase|merge; without it the script usesmergeMethodfrom.claude/agent-harness.json, else the repo's first allowed method (squash, rebase, merge). It enforces the merge rails listed in the README. On a refusal, read the reason and go back to the loop (see Blockers). - Post-merge cleanup. After a successful merge,
ship-mergerunsagent-harness cleanup <pr>. Read thecleanup:lines it prints (remote,local,checkout,backup,worktree). For an item kept for a fixable reason (for example a checkout switch that failed on a dirty tree), fix the cause without discarding changes, then runagent-harness cleanup <pr>once more. Never remove a worktree; cleanup only reports it. Thenagent-harness notify done "<msg>" <pr>andagent-harness goal status.
What ships with it
2 files beside SKILL.md in the same directory: the scripts, references and assets a skill reads on demand. Not counted in the per-session cost; read them before you install if any of them is executable.
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.
- yesterday Changed df428c7d1ebc
- 2d ago Changed · +7 lines b8b0bdbf4934
- 3d ago Changed · +2 lines d47fbcd82a78
- 4d ago First seen · 151 lines · 77 tokens per session scan A 44c039942e06
ship is a skill published in the GitHub repository fmflurry/settings-opencode (171 stars, last pushed yesterday), licensed MIT. It adds 77 tokens to every session and 2,762 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-10-12.
Other skills, from other repositories
conductor-implement
Execute tasks from a track's implementation plan following TDD workflow.
gh-issue
Size-audit, write, and split BanyanDB issues that somebody else or an automated TDD workflow can implement. Use whenever the user asks to file or revise an issue, decide whether an issue is too large, make an issue TDD-ready, turn a design into tickets, or split an umbrella into executable leaves. Do not draft or file…
implement-feature
Implement an approved feature plan with fresh-context slices, TDD, revision-bound evidence, and PR-ready output.
product
Consolidated Galyarder Framework Product intelligence bundle.
ring:implementing-tasks
Implementing a single planned task (Task N.M.T) end-to-end: selects the right backend agent by language and service type, drives one TDD RED->GREEN turn, then verifies coverage, lint, license headers, runtime, and delivery before handoff. Runs as Gate 0 before ring:reviewing-code. Use to drive ONE task inside an…
create-issues
Creates GitHub issues following test-driven development principles and proper labeling conventions. This skill should be used when the user asks to "create an issue", "file a bug", or needs to document new requirements, epics, or PR-scoped tasks.