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 Heyvhuang/ship-faster --skill review-merge-readinessgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Heyvhuang/ship-fasterWrote 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/heyvhuang/ship-faster/review-merge-readiness)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/heyvhuang/ship-faster/review-merge-readiness"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/heyvhuang/ship-faster/review-merge-readiness/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/heyvhuang/ship-faster/review-merge-readiness"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/heyvhuang/ship-faster/review-merge-readiness.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector pass
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 | $0.00791 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00039 | $0.00396 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00015 | $0.00158 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00008 | $0.00079 |
Grade A, and why
review-merge-readiness scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 13d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 90 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Requesting Code Review (Structured Review: Requirements Alignment + Production Readiness)
Goal: Make code review a repeatable process, not random comments.
Core principle: Review early, review often.
When Review is Required
Mandatory:
- After completing important features
- After each batch in
workflow-execute-plansends (default 3 tasks per batch) - Before merging to main branch
Optional but valuable:
- When stuck (get a fresh perspective)
- Before major refactoring (establish baseline first)
- After fixing complex bugs (verify no new regressions)
How to Initiate (Minimum Information Set)
1) Determine Review Scope (git SHA)
Prefer using "baseline before plan/task started" as BASE_SHA:
# Common approach: use main as baseline
BASE_SHA=$(git merge-base HEAD main 2>/dev/null || git merge-base HEAD master)
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
If you want to review just the most recent commit within a small task:
BASE_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD~1)
HEAD_SHA=$(git rev-parse HEAD)
2) Prepare Review Basis (Plan / Requirements)
Review must provide:
- WHAT_WAS_IMPLEMENTED: What you just completed (1-3 bullet points)
- PLAN_OR_REQUIREMENTS: Corresponding plan excerpt or requirements document path (e.g.,
run_dir/03-plans/features/<feature_slug>-plan.md)
3) Get diff (Evidence)
git diff --stat "$BASE_SHA..$HEAD_SHA"
git diff "$BASE_SHA..$HEAD_SHA"
Review Execution Methods (Choose One)
Method A: Sub-Agent Review (if your system supports it)
Use template: review-merge-readiness/code-reviewer.md, fill in placeholders and execute.
Method B: Self Review (works without sub-agent)
Check each item per template checklist and output same structured result (Strengths + Issues by severity + Verdict).
Review Output Format (Must Be Structured)
Output must include:
- Strengths: Specific positives (at least 1)
- Issues: Categorized by severity:
- Critical (Must Fix): Security/data loss/functionality bugs/would cause production incidents
- Important (Should Fix): Obviously poor architecture/missing error handling/test gaps/requirements misalignment
- Minor (Nice to Have): Style/small optimizations/documentation polish
- Assessment: Merge readiness (Yes/No/With fixes) + 1-2 sentence technical reasoning
What ships with it
1 file 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.
- 13d ago First seen · 90 lines · 77 tokens per session scan A 2e3a1dd9f125
review-merge-readiness is a skill published in the GitHub repository Heyvhuang/ship-faster (339 stars, last pushed 28d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 77 tokens to every session and 791 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-08-30.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
omh-code-review
This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.
full-repo-review
Comprehensive four-wave review of all repo source files, producing a prioritized issue backlog.
agent-teams-simplify-and-harden
Implementation + audit loop using parallel agent teams with structured simplify, harden, and document passes. Spawns implementation agents to do the work, then audit agents to find complexity, security gaps, and spec deviations, then loops until code compiles cleanly, all tests pass, and auditors find zero issues or…