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 nelsonwerd/idea-to-ship-skills --skill build-loopgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/nelsonwerd/idea-to-ship-skillsWrote 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/nelsonwerd/idea-to-ship-skills/build-loop)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/nelsonwerd/idea-to-ship-skills/build-loop"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/nelsonwerd/idea-to-ship-skills/build-loop/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/nelsonwerd/idea-to-ship-skills/build-loop"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/nelsonwerd/idea-to-ship-skills/build-loop.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>- NVIDIA SkillSpector warn
SkillSpector: 1 finding, up to medium
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 →
- medium Excessive Agency · line 28 Skill enables autonomous high-impact decisions without human-in-the-loop verification. Critical operations (destructive commands, financial transactions, data deletion) should require explicit user confirmation.Fix: Add human-in-the-loop confirmation for destructive, irreversible, or high-impact operations. Never auto-execute commands that modify files, send data, or alter system state.
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 | $0.00206 | $0.04713 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00103 | $0.02357 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00041 | $0.00943 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00021 | $0.00471 |
Grade A, and why
build-loop 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 9d 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 — 157 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Build-Loop — see-and-exercise iteration until a build actually works
build-loop takes a build that compiles-but-isn't-done and drives it toward near-finish-line craft by repeating one disciplined cycle — build → see → exercise → check → critique → rebuild — until its acceptance criteria pass or a stop-condition fires. It doesn't just re-read its own plan; it runs, sees, and exercises what it built, then feeds those observations back into the next rebuild.
It is composition-first: it orchestrates tools the agent already has — bash (build/test), a headless screenshot + vision to see, Playwright/headless to exercise the flows, axe/Lighthouse to check — via prose. It is not a new program, and not a reinvention of the see-and-exercise agents vendors already ship; it's the discipline that wraps them: a target, a loop, a stop-condition, and an honest ledger of what was actually checked.
This skill is the downstream partner to prompt-pack (which sequences what to build) and ideate (which decides whether to build it). It carries prompt-pack's execute-discipline (never fake a signal you didn't run) and ideate's conditional-design (a design bar only when feel is load-bearing).
When to use this
Strong triggers — invoke without asking:
- "Tighten this build" / "drive it to near-finish-line" / "make it actually work, not just compile"
- "Iterate until it passes" / "loop until the core flows pass"
- "Self-verify the UI" / "see whether what I built actually renders and works"
Softer triggers — invoke proactively:
- A scaffold or feature just landed and you want it driven from "compiles" to "works + holds a craft bar."
- You're about to hand a draft to a human and want the machine-checkable defects gone first.
Do NOT use this for:
- Deciding what to build or whether it's worth building → that's
ideate. - Judging whether a design/strategy/codebase is sound or safe → that's
deep-dive. - A one-line fix you can make and eyeball in ten seconds → just do it.
- Validating that people want it → out of scope (see bounds below); that's the human/market handoff.
What ships with it
3 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.
- 9d ago First seen · 157 lines · 206 tokens per session scan A 925ad760ffdf
build-loop is a skill published in the GitHub repository nelsonwerd/idea-to-ship-skills (83 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 206 tokens to every session and 4,713 once invoked, about $0.0010 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
screenshot-automation
Generates an automated App Store screenshot pipeline with UI tests for screenshot capture, device framing, localized caption overlays, and multi-size batch export. Use when user wants automated screenshots, App Store screenshot generation, or a fastlane snapshot replacement.
test-generator
Generate test templates for unit tests, integration tests, and UI tests using Swift Testing and XCTest. Use when adding tests to iOS/macOS apps.
multi-agent-e2e-validation
Multi-agent parallel E2E validation for database refactors. TRIGGERS - E2E validation, schema migration testing, database refactor validation.
symmetric-dogfooding
Bidirectional integration validation where two repositories validate each other before release.
schema-e2e-validation
Earthly E2E validation for YAML schema contracts. TRIGGERS - schema validation, YAML schema, schema contracts, regenerate types.
cypress-ops
Cypress end-to-end and component testing operations - selector/retry-ability strategy, cy.intercept network stubbing, cy.session auth, component vs e2e, flake diagnosis, CI, Test Replay. Use for: cypress, e2e test, component test, cy.get, cy.intercept, cy.session, data-cy, data-test, retry-ability, flake, flaky test…