ship-gate
$
npx mdskill add alirezarezvani/claude-skills/ship-gateBlocks production deployments until critical code issues are resolved.
- Intercepts deploy commands to prevent risky code from reaching production.
- Scans for security, database, and dependency vulnerabilities across stacks.
- Decides execution by detecting stack type and verifying recent code changes.
- Reports pass/fail status with manual review options for each category.
SKILL.md
.github/skills/ship-gateView on GitHub ↗
---
name: ship-gate
description: >
Pre-production audit that scans a codebase for security, database,
deployment, code quality, AI/LLM, dependency, frontend, and observability
issues. Intercepts deploy commands and blocks until critical items pass.
Stack-agnostic. Use for "run ship gate", "am I ready to ship",
"pre-launch audit", "can I deploy", "push to production", "go live
checklist", "preflight check". Not for CI/CD setup or infra provisioning.
license: MIT
metadata:
author: Rajaraman Arumugam
version: 1.0.0
---
# Ship Gate
Pre-production audit that scans a codebase and reports pass/fail/manual
across 8 categories before anything ships.
## Intercept Behavior
When the user says "push to production", "deploy", "ship it", "go live",
or similar deploy-intent phrases, do NOT proceed with deployment. Instead:
1. Ask: "Have you run the ship gate? Want me to scan now?"
2. If yes, run the full audit below.
3. If the user says they already ran it, ask when. If more than 24 hours
ago or if code changed since, recommend re-running.
## How It Works
### Step 1: Detect Stack
Run these checks in order to identify the project stack:
```
Framework detection:
package.json exists -> Node.js project
"next" in dependencies -> Next.js
"react" in dependencies -> React (if not Next.js)
"vue" in dependencies -> Vue
"svelte" in dependencies -> Svelte
"astro" in dependencies -> Astro
"express" in dependencies -> Express
"fastify" in dependencies -> Fastify
"hono" in dependencies -> Hono
requirements.txt or pyproject.toml -> Python project
"django" present -> Django
"flask" present -> Flask
"fastapi" present -> FastAPI
go.mod exists -> Go project
Cargo.toml exists -> Rust project
Database detection:
"@supabase/supabase-js" in package.json -> Supabase
supabase/ directory exists -> Supabase
"prisma" in dependencies -> Prisma (check schema for DB type)
"mongoose" in dependencies -> MongoDB
"pg" or "postgres" in dependencies -> PostgreSQL
firebase.json or .firebaserc exists -> Firebase
Deploy target detection:
vercel.json or .vercel/ exists -> Vercel
netlify.toml exists -> Netlify
Dockerfile exists -> Docker/VPS
fly.toml exists -> Fly.io
railway.json exists -> Railway
.platform/applications.yaml -> Platform.sh
Auth detection:
"@clerk" in dependencies -> Clerk
"next-auth" in dependencies -> NextAuth
"@supabase/auth-helpers" in deps -> Supabase Auth
"firebase/auth" in imports -> Firebase Auth
AI/LLM detection:
"openai" in dependencies -> OpenAI
"@anthropic-ai/sdk" in dependencies -> Claude API
"@google/generative-ai" in deps -> Gemini
```
Report detected stack before proceeding. This determines which checks
are relevant. Checks tagged with a specific stack in `references/checks.md`
are skipped if that stack is not detected.
### Step 2: Run Automated Checks
Run categories in this order: SEC, DB, CODE, DEP, AI, DEPLOY, FE, OBS.
Security and database first because they produce the most critical findings.
For each category, run every auto-scannable check from
`references/checks.md` using the patterns in `references/patterns.md`.
Report progress after each category completes:
```
[1/8] Security: 3 FAIL, 12 PASS, 3 SKIP
[2/8] Database: 1 FAIL, 5 PASS, 6 SKIP
...
```
Report results as:
- PASS: check passed
- FAIL: issue found (with file path and line number)
- SKIP: not applicable to this stack
### Step 3: Manual Confirmation
For checks that cannot be automated (backup restore tested, rollback plan
exists, staging test passed), present them as a checklist and ask the user
to confirm each one.
### Step 4: Verdict
Classify results into three severities:
- CRITICAL: must fix before shipping (secrets exposed, no auth on routes,
no HTTPS, SQL injection vectors, no RLS on Supabase tables)
- HIGH: should fix before shipping (no error boundaries, no rate limiting,
console.logs in production, no pagination)
- ADVISORY: recommended but not blocking (no OG tags, no custom 404,
no analytics, no SBOM)
Final output:
```
SHIP GATE REPORT
================
Stack: Next.js + Supabase + Vercel
Scan time: 12s
CRITICAL (3 items, must fix)
FAIL [SEC-01] API key found in src/lib/api.ts:14
FAIL [DB-07] RLS not enabled on "profiles" table
FAIL [SEC-05] No CSRF protection on /api/checkout
HIGH (5 items, should fix)
FAIL [CODE-01] 12 console.log statements in production code
FAIL [CODE-03] Empty catch block in src/utils/auth.ts:45
FAIL [DEP-04] 3 critical npm audit vulnerabilities
FAIL [DEPLOY-05] No rollback plan documented
MANUAL [DEPLOY-06] Staging test not confirmed
ADVISORY (4 items, recommended)
FAIL [FE-01] Missing OG meta tags
FAIL [FE-03] No custom 404 page
PASS [OBS-01] Error monitoring configured
SKIP [AI-01] No AI/LLM usage detected
VERDICT: DO NOT SHIP (3 critical issues)
Fix critical items and re-run.
```
If zero critical items remain, verdict is: CLEAR TO SHIP.
If only high items remain, verdict is: SHIP WITH CAUTION (acknowledge risks).
## Categories
Eight categories, each with a code prefix. Full check details in
`references/checks.md`.
| Prefix | Category | Auto | Manual | Tool |
|--------|----------|------|--------|------|
| SEC | Security | 15 | 3 | 0 |
| DB | Database | 7 | 5 | 0 |
| DEPLOY | Deployment | 3 | 8 | 0 |
| CODE | Code Quality | 11 | 0 | 1 |
| AI | AI/LLM Security | 5 | 3 | 0 |
| DEP | Dependencies | 5 | 0 | 1 |
| FE | Frontend Quality | 7 | 3 | 0 |
| OBS | Observability | 2 | 5 | 0 |
## Scope
This skill audits. It does not fix. When it finds issues, it reports
them with file locations and remediation guidance. The user or another
skill (systematic-debugging, backend-patterns, shadcn-stack) handles
the fix.
This skill does not:
- Set up CI/CD pipelines
- Provision infrastructure
- Configure monitoring tools
- Run after deployment (it is pre-deploy only)
## Integration Points
- **karpathy-coder**: run ship-gate after karpathy-check passes — simplicity first, then production readiness
- **adversarial-reviewer**: deep security review for items ship-gate flags as critical
- **security-pen-testing**: penetration testing methodology for SEC-category findings
- **code-reviewer**: general code quality review complements ship-gate's automated checks
More from alirezarezvani/claude-skills
- a11y-auditAccessibility audit skill for scanning, fixing, and verifying WCAG 2.2 Level A and AA compliance across React, Next.js, Vue, Angular, Svelte, and plain HTML codebases. Use when auditing accessibility, fixing a11y violations, checking color contrast, generating compliance reports, or integrating accessibility checks into CI/CD pipelines.
- ab-test-setupWhen the user wants to plan, design, or implement an A/B test or experiment. Also use when the user mentions "A/B test," "split test," "experiment," "test this change," "variant copy," "multivariate test," "hypothesis," "conversion experiment," "statistical significance," or "test this." For tracking implementation, see analytics-tracking.
- ad-creativeWhen the user needs to generate, iterate, or scale ad creative for paid advertising. Use when they say 'write ad copy,' 'generate headlines,' 'create ad variations,' 'bulk creative,' 'iterate on ads,' 'ad copy validation,' 'RSA headlines,' 'Meta ad copy,' 'LinkedIn ad,' or 'creative testing.' This is pure creative production — distinct from paid-ads (campaign strategy). Use ad-creative when you need the copy, not the campaign plan.
- adversarial-reviewerAdversarial code review that breaks the self-review monoculture. Use when you want a genuinely critical review of recent changes, before merging a PR, or when you suspect Claude is being too agreeable about code quality. Forces perspective shifts through hostile reviewer personas that catch blind spots the author's mental model shares with the reviewer.
- aeoAnswer Engine Optimization (AEO) skill — optimize content to be cited by AI language models (ChatGPT, Perplexity, Claude, Gemini, Mistral) as authoritative sources. Distinct from SEO — AEO optimizes for citation in LLM-generated responses, not search rankings. Use when planning content for AI-first search audiences, auditing existing content for E-E-A-T signals, tracking which pages get cited by which LLMs, or building a citation-friendly content strategy. Triggers — 'AEO audit', 'optimize for ChatGPT', 'get cited by Perplexity', 'LLM citation strategy', 'answer engine optimization', 'content for AI search', 'E-E-A-T audit'. Output is a markdown audit report (default) or JSON for pipeline integration. Stdlib-only Python tools.
- agent-designerUse when the user asks to design a multi-agent system, pick an orchestration pattern (supervisor/swarm/pipeline), generate tool schemas for agents, or evaluate agent execution logs for cost, latency, and failure bottlenecks. Examples: 'design an agent architecture for research automation', 'generate Anthropic tool schemas from these tool descriptions', 'analyze these agent run logs for bottlenecks'. NOT for Claude Code workflow files (use workflow-builder) or single-agent prompt design (use agent-workflow-designer).
- agent-protocolInter-agent communication protocol for C-suite agent teams. Defines invocation syntax, loop prevention, isolation rules, and response formats. Use when C-suite agents need to query each other, coordinate cross-functional analysis, or run board meetings with multiple agent roles.
- agent-workflow-designerDesign production-grade multi-agent workflows with clear pattern choice (sequential, parallel, hierarchical), handoff contracts, failure handling, and cost/context controls. Use when architecting a multi-step agent pipeline, choosing between single-agent vs multi-agent approaches, or refactoring an LLM workflow that suffers from context bloat or unreliable handoffs.
- agenthubMulti-agent collaboration plugin that spawns N parallel subagents competing on the same task via git worktree isolation. Agents work independently, results are evaluated by metric or LLM judge, and the best branch is merged. Use when: user wants multiple approaches tried in parallel — code optimization, content variation, research exploration, or any task that benefits from parallel competition. Requires: a git repo.
- agile-product-ownerAgile product ownership for backlog management and sprint execution. Covers user story writing, acceptance criteria, sprint planning, and velocity tracking. Use when writing user stories, creating acceptance criteria, planning sprints, estimating story points, breaking down epics, or prioritizing the backlog.