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 lgbarn/shipyard --skill shipyard-brainstorminggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/lgbarn/shipyardWrote 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/lgbarn/shipyard/shipyard-brainstorming)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/lgbarn/shipyard/shipyard-brainstorming"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/lgbarn/shipyard/shipyard-brainstorming/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/lgbarn/shipyard/shipyard-brainstorming"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/lgbarn/shipyard/shipyard-brainstorming.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to high
These are SkillSpector’s own severities. On a checked sample its high-severity flags on skills were ~96% false positives — a documented command, a public API, a “never do X” rule — so we show them as a caution to read, not a verdict. Why →
- high Prompt Injection · line 6 Hidden instructions were detected in comments or invisible text. These could contain malicious directives. Manual review is recommended.Fix: Audit all comments and invisible characters. Remove any instructions that direct the agent to perform unauthorized actions. Use plain, reviewable content.
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 | $0.00097 | $0.01178 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00039 | $0.00471 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00019 | $0.00236 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00010 | $0.00118 |
Grade A, and why
shipyard-brainstorming 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 6d 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 — 132 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Brainstorming Ideas Into Designs
When to Use
- User wants to build, create, or add something new
- User says "let's build", "I want to add", "what if we..."
- Design discussion or feature exploration is happening
- During
/shipyard:brainstormfor requirements gathering - Before any creative work: creating features, building components, adding functionality, modifying behavior
Natural Language Triggers
- "I want to add", "let's design", "brainstorm", "what if we", "I have an idea", "let's think about"
Overview
Help turn ideas into fully formed designs through natural collaborative dialogue. Understand the project context, ask questions one at a time, then present the design in small sections (200-300 words) with validation after each.
Shipyard integration: This skill is invoked by the /shipyard:brainstorm command for project requirements gathering. It can also be used standalone for any creative exploration or design work.
The Process
Phase 1: Understanding the Idea
- Check out the current project state first (files, docs, recent commits)
- Ask questions one at a time to refine the idea
- Prefer multiple choice questions when possible, but open-ended is fine too
- Only one question per message - if a topic needs more exploration, break it into multiple questions
- Focus on understanding: purpose, constraints, success criteria
Multiple-choice question template:
I see a few ways to handle [topic]:
A) [Option] -- [one-sentence trade-off]
B) [Option] -- [one-sentence trade-off]
C) [Option] -- [one-sentence trade-off]
I'd lean toward (A) because [reason]. Which feels right for your case?
Phase 2: Exploring Approaches
- Propose 2-3 different approaches with trade-offs
- Present options conversationally with your recommendation and reasoning
- Lead with your recommended option and explain why
Phase 3: Presenting the Design
- Once you believe you understand what you're building, present the design
- Break it into sections of 200-300 words
- Ask after each section whether it looks right so far
- Cover: architecture, components, data flow, error handling, testing
- Be ready to go back and clarify if something doesn't make sense
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.
- 6d ago Changed · +2 tokens per session add7a230228b
- 1mo ago First seen · 132 lines · 95 tokens per session scan A c61cf0cbb121
shipyard-brainstorming is a skill published in the GitHub repository lgbarn/shipyard (65 stars, last pushed 6d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 97 tokens to every session and 1,178 once invoked, about $0.0004 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 2026-09-03.
Other skills, from other repositories
gate-wiring
Detects unused exports, orphaned files, architecture layer violations, and circular dependencies across changed files. Delegates to architect agent for structural analysis. Internal gate — invoked by verify.
sw-design
Autonomous solution architecture. Researches the codebase, designs a solution, challenges it adversarially, and produces design artifacts.
sw-review
Fetches and displays PR review comments from GitHub, grouped by priority, and allows the user to reply to or resolve individual threads.
gate-semantic
Tiered semantic analysis of changed code (rg → ast-grep → OpenGrep). Detects error-path bugs structural gates miss. Findings default to WARN. Internal — invoked by verify.
sw-audit
Periodic codebase health check. Analyzes architecture, complexity, consistency, and debt across the full codebase. Produces persistent findings in AUDIT.md.
critical-code-reviewer
Rigorously review code or pull requests for correctness, security, accessibility, maintainability, tests, and edge cases. Use when users request a critical code review, want a guided walkthrough of findings, need implementer-facing feedback, or want to prepare, create, or submit a GitHub pull request review.