--- name: ship preamble-tier: 4 version: 1.0.0 description: | Ship workflow: detect + merge base branch, run tests, review diff, bump VERSION, update CHANGELOG, commit, push, create PR. Use when asked to "ship", "deploy", "push to main", "create a PR", or "merge and push". Proactively suggest when the user says code is ready or asks about deploying. allowed-tools: - Bash - Read - Write - Edit - Grep - Glob - Agent - AskUserQuestion - WebSearch --- {{PREAMBLE}} {{BASE_BRANCH_DETECT}} # Ship: Fully Automated Ship Workflow You are running the `/ship` workflow. This is a **non-interactive, fully automated** workflow. Do NOT ask for confirmation at any step. The user said `/ship` which means DO IT. Run straight through and output the PR URL at the end. **Only stop for:** - On the base branch (abort) - Merge conflicts that can't be auto-resolved (stop, show conflicts) - In-branch test failures (pre-existing failures are triaged, not auto-blocking) - Pre-landing review finds ASK items that need user judgment - MINOR or MAJOR version bump needed (ask — see Step 4) - Greptile review comments that need user decision (complex fixes, false positives) - AI-assessed coverage below minimum threshold (hard gate with user override — see Step 3.4) - Plan items NOT DONE with no user override (see Step 3.45) - Plan verification failures (see Step 3.47) - TODOS.md missing and user wants to create one (ask — see Step 5.5) - TODOS.md disorganized and user wants to reorganize (ask — see Step 5.5) **Never stop for:** - Uncommitted changes (always include them) - Version bump choice (auto-pick MICRO or PATCH — see Step 4) - CHANGELOG content (auto-generate from diff) - Commit message approval (auto-commit) - Multi-file changesets (auto-split into bisectable commits) - TODOS.md completed-item detection (auto-mark) - Auto-fixable review findings (dead code, N+1, stale comments — fixed automatically) - Test coverage gaps within target threshold (auto-generate and commit, or flag in PR body) --- ## Step 1: Pre-flight 1. Check the current branch. If on the base branch or the repo's default branch, **abort**: "You're on the base branch. Ship from a feature branch." 2. Run `git status` (never use `-uall`). Uncommitted changes are always included — no need to ask. 3. Run `git diff ...HEAD --stat` and `git log ..HEAD --oneline` to understand what's being shipped. 4. Check review readiness: {{REVIEW_DASHBOARD}} If the Eng Review is NOT "CLEAR": Print: "No prior eng review found — ship will run its own pre-landing review in Step 3.5." Check diff size: `git diff ...HEAD --stat | tail -1`. If the diff is >200 lines, add: "Note: This is a large diff. Consider running `/plan-eng-review` or `/autoplan` for architecture-level review before shipping." If CEO Review is missing, mention as informational ("CEO Review not run — recommended for product changes") but do NOT block. For Design Review: run `source <(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-diff-scope 2>/dev/null)`. If `SCOPE_FRONTEND=true` and no design review (plan-design-review or design-review-lite) exists in the dashboard, mention: "Design Review not run — this PR changes frontend code. The lite design check will run automatically in Step 3.5, but consider running /design-review for a full visual audit post-implementation." Still never block. Continue to Step 1.5 — do NOT block or ask. Ship runs its own review in Step 3.5. --- ## Step 1.5: Distribution Pipeline Check If the diff introduces a new standalone artifact (CLI binary, library package, tool) — not a web service with existing deployment — verify that a distribution pipeline exists. 1. Check if the diff adds a new `cmd/` directory, `main.go`, or `bin/` entry point: ```bash git diff origin/ --name-only | grep -E '(cmd/.*/main\.go|bin/|Cargo\.toml|setup\.py|package\.json)' | head -5 ``` 2. If new artifact detected, check for a release workflow: ```bash ls .github/workflows/ 2>/dev/null | grep -iE 'release|publish|dist' grep -qE 'release|publish|deploy' .gitlab-ci.yml 2>/dev/null && echo "GITLAB_CI_RELEASE" ``` 3. **If no release pipeline exists and a new artifact was added:** Use AskUserQuestion: - "This PR adds a new binary/tool but there's no CI/CD pipeline to build and publish it. Users won't be able to download the artifact after merge." - A) Add a release workflow now (CI/CD release pipeline — GitHub Actions or GitLab CI depending on platform) - B) Defer — add to TODOS.md - C) Not needed — this is internal/web-only, existing deployment covers it 4. **If release pipeline exists:** Continue silently. 5. **If no new artifact detected:** Skip silently. --- ## Step 2: Merge the base branch (BEFORE tests) Fetch and merge the base branch into the feature branch so tests run against the merged state: ```bash git fetch origin && git merge origin/ --no-edit ``` **If there are merge conflicts:** Try to auto-resolve if they are simple (VERSION, schema.rb, CHANGELOG ordering). If conflicts are complex or ambiguous, **STOP** and show them. **If already up to date:** Continue silently. --- ## Step 2.5: Test Framework Bootstrap {{TEST_BOOTSTRAP}} --- ## Step 3: Run tests (on merged code) **Do NOT run `RAILS_ENV=test bin/rails db:migrate`** — `bin/test-lane` already calls `db:test:prepare` internally, which loads the schema into the correct lane database. Running bare test migrations without INSTANCE hits an orphan DB and corrupts structure.sql. Run both test suites in parallel: ```bash bin/test-lane 2>&1 | tee /tmp/ship_tests.txt & npm run test 2>&1 | tee /tmp/ship_vitest.txt & wait ``` After both complete, read the output files and check pass/fail. **If any test fails:** Do NOT immediately stop. Apply the Test Failure Ownership Triage: {{TEST_FAILURE_TRIAGE}} **After triage:** If any in-branch failures remain unfixed, **STOP**. Do not proceed. If all failures were pre-existing and handled (fixed, TODOed, assigned, or skipped), continue to Step 3.25. **If all pass:** Continue silently — just note the counts briefly. --- ## Step 3.25: Eval Suites (conditional) Evals are mandatory when prompt-related files change. Skip this step entirely if no prompt files are in the diff. **1. Check if the diff touches prompt-related files:** ```bash git diff origin/ --name-only ``` Match against these patterns (from CLAUDE.md): - `app/services/*_prompt_builder.rb` - `app/services/*_generation_service.rb`, `*_writer_service.rb`, `*_designer_service.rb` - `app/services/*_evaluator.rb`, `*_scorer.rb`, `*_classifier_service.rb`, `*_analyzer.rb` - `app/services/concerns/*voice*.rb`, `*writing*.rb`, `*prompt*.rb`, `*token*.rb` - `app/services/chat_tools/*.rb`, `app/services/x_thread_tools/*.rb` - `config/system_prompts/*.txt` - `test/evals/**/*` (eval infrastructure changes affect all suites) **If no matches:** Print "No prompt-related files changed — skipping evals." and continue to Step 3.5. **2. Identify affected eval suites:** Each eval runner (`test/evals/*_eval_runner.rb`) declares `PROMPT_SOURCE_FILES` listing which source files affect it. Grep these to find which suites match the changed files: ```bash grep -l "changed_file_basename" test/evals/*_eval_runner.rb ``` Map runner → test file: `post_generation_eval_runner.rb` → `post_generation_eval_test.rb`. **Special cases:** - Changes to `test/evals/judges/*.rb`, `test/evals/support/*.rb`, or `test/evals/fixtures/` affect ALL suites that use those judges/support files. Check imports in the eval test files to determine which. - Changes to `config/system_prompts/*.txt` — grep eval runners for the prompt filename to find affected suites. - If unsure which suites are affected, run ALL suites that could plausibly be impacted. Over-testing is better than missing a regression. **3. Run affected suites at `EVAL_JUDGE_TIER=full`:** `/ship` is a pre-merge gate, so always use full tier (Sonnet structural + Opus persona judges). ```bash EVAL_JUDGE_TIER=full EVAL_VERBOSE=1 bin/test-lane --eval test/evals/_eval_test.rb 2>&1 | tee /tmp/ship_evals.txt ``` If multiple suites need to run, run them sequentially (each needs a test lane). If the first suite fails, stop immediately — don't burn API cost on remaining suites. **4. Check results:** - **If any eval fails:** Show the failures, the cost dashboard, and **STOP**. Do not proceed. - **If all pass:** Note pass counts and cost. Continue to Step 3.5. **5. Save eval output** — include eval results and cost dashboard in the PR body (Step 8). **Tier reference (for context — /ship always uses `full`):** | Tier | When | Speed (cached) | Cost | |------|------|----------------|------| | `fast` (Haiku) | Dev iteration, smoke tests | ~5s (14x faster) | ~$0.07/run | | `standard` (Sonnet) | Default dev, `bin/test-lane --eval` | ~17s (4x faster) | ~$0.37/run | | `full` (Opus persona) | **`/ship` and pre-merge** | ~72s (baseline) | ~$1.27/run | --- ## Step 3.4: Test Coverage Audit {{TEST_COVERAGE_AUDIT_SHIP}} --- ## Step 3.45: Plan Completion Audit {{PLAN_COMPLETION_AUDIT_SHIP}} --- {{PLAN_VERIFICATION_EXEC}} --- ## Step 3.5: Pre-Landing Review Review the diff for structural issues that tests don't catch. 1. Read `.claude/skills/review/checklist.md`. If the file cannot be read, **STOP** and report the error. 2. Run `git diff origin/` to get the full diff (scoped to feature changes against the freshly-fetched base branch). 3. Apply the review checklist in two passes: - **Pass 1 (CRITICAL):** SQL & Data Safety, LLM Output Trust Boundary - **Pass 2 (INFORMATIONAL):** All remaining categories {{DESIGN_REVIEW_LITE}} Include any design findings alongside the code review findings. They follow the same Fix-First flow below. 4. **Classify each finding as AUTO-FIX or ASK** per the Fix-First Heuristic in checklist.md. Critical findings lean toward ASK; informational lean toward AUTO-FIX. 5. **Auto-fix all AUTO-FIX items.** Apply each fix. Output one line per fix: `[AUTO-FIXED] [file:line] Problem → what you did` 6. **If ASK items remain,** present them in ONE AskUserQuestion: - List each with number, severity, problem, recommended fix - Per-item options: A) Fix B) Skip - Overall RECOMMENDATION - If 3 or fewer ASK items, you may use individual AskUserQuestion calls instead 7. **After all fixes (auto + user-approved):** - If ANY fixes were applied: commit fixed files by name (`git add && git commit -m "fix: pre-landing review fixes"`), then **STOP** and tell the user to run `/ship` again to re-test. - If no fixes applied (all ASK items skipped, or no issues found): continue to Step 4. 8. Output summary: `Pre-Landing Review: N issues — M auto-fixed, K asked (J fixed, L skipped)` If no issues found: `Pre-Landing Review: No issues found.` 9. Persist the review result to the review log: ```bash ~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-review-log '{"skill":"review","timestamp":"TIMESTAMP","status":"STATUS","issues_found":N,"critical":N,"informational":N,"commit":"'"$(git rev-parse --short HEAD)"'","via":"ship"}' ``` Substitute TIMESTAMP (ISO 8601), STATUS ("clean" if no issues, "issues_found" otherwise), and N values from the summary counts above. The `via:"ship"` distinguishes from standalone `/review` runs. Save the review output — it goes into the PR body in Step 8. --- ## Step 3.75: Address Greptile review comments (if PR exists) Read `.claude/skills/review/greptile-triage.md` and follow the fetch, filter, classify, and **escalation detection** steps. **If no PR exists, `gh` fails, API returns an error, or there are zero Greptile comments:** Skip this step silently. Continue to Step 4. **If Greptile comments are found:** Include a Greptile summary in your output: `+ N Greptile comments (X valid, Y fixed, Z FP)` Before replying to any comment, run the **Escalation Detection** algorithm from greptile-triage.md to determine whether to use Tier 1 (friendly) or Tier 2 (firm) reply templates. For each classified comment: **VALID & ACTIONABLE:** Use AskUserQuestion with: - The comment (file:line or [top-level] + body summary + permalink URL) - `RECOMMENDATION: Choose A because [one-line reason]` - Options: A) Fix now, B) Acknowledge and ship anyway, C) It's a false positive - If user chooses A: apply the fix, commit the fixed files (`git add && git commit -m "fix: address Greptile review — "`), reply using the **Fix reply template** from greptile-triage.md (include inline diff + explanation), and save to both per-project and global greptile-history (type: fix). - If user chooses C: reply using the **False Positive reply template** from greptile-triage.md (include evidence + suggested re-rank), save to both per-project and global greptile-history (type: fp). **VALID BUT ALREADY FIXED:** Reply using the **Already Fixed reply template** from greptile-triage.md — no AskUserQuestion needed: - Include what was done and the fixing commit SHA - Save to both per-project and global greptile-history (type: already-fixed) **FALSE POSITIVE:** Use AskUserQuestion: - Show the comment and why you think it's wrong (file:line or [top-level] + body summary + permalink URL) - Options: - A) Reply to Greptile explaining the false positive (recommended if clearly wrong) - B) Fix it anyway (if trivial) - C) Ignore silently - If user chooses A: reply using the **False Positive reply template** from greptile-triage.md (include evidence + suggested re-rank), save to both per-project and global greptile-history (type: fp) **SUPPRESSED:** Skip silently — these are known false positives from previous triage. **After all comments are resolved:** If any fixes were applied, the tests from Step 3 are now stale. **Re-run tests** (Step 3) before continuing to Step 4. If no fixes were applied, continue to Step 4. --- {{ADVERSARIAL_STEP}} ## Step 4: Version bump (auto-decide) 1. Read the current `VERSION` file (4-digit format: `MAJOR.MINOR.PATCH.MICRO`) 2. **Auto-decide the bump level based on the diff:** - Count lines changed (`git diff origin/...HEAD --stat | tail -1`) - **MICRO** (4th digit): < 50 lines changed, trivial tweaks, typos, config - **PATCH** (3rd digit): 50+ lines changed, bug fixes, small-medium features - **MINOR** (2nd digit): **ASK the user** — only for major features or significant architectural changes - **MAJOR** (1st digit): **ASK the user** — only for milestones or breaking changes 3. Compute the new version: - Bumping a digit resets all digits to its right to 0 - Example: `0.19.1.0` + PATCH → `0.19.2.0` 4. Write the new version to the `VERSION` file. --- ## Step 5: CHANGELOG (auto-generate) 1. Read `CHANGELOG.md` header to know the format. 2. Auto-generate the entry from **ALL commits on the branch** (not just recent ones): - Use `git log ..HEAD --oneline` to see every commit being shipped - Use `git diff ...HEAD` to see the full diff against the base branch - The CHANGELOG entry must be comprehensive of ALL changes going into the PR - If existing CHANGELOG entries on the branch already cover some commits, replace them with one unified entry for the new version - Categorize changes into applicable sections: - `### Added` — new features - `### Changed` — changes to existing functionality - `### Fixed` — bug fixes - `### Removed` — removed features - Write concise, descriptive bullet points - Insert after the file header (line 5), dated today - Format: `## [X.Y.Z.W] - YYYY-MM-DD` **Do NOT ask the user to describe changes.** Infer from the diff and commit history. --- ## Step 5.5: TODOS.md (auto-update) Cross-reference the project's TODOS.md against the changes being shipped. Mark completed items automatically; prompt only if the file is missing or disorganized. Read `.claude/skills/review/TODOS-format.md` for the canonical format reference. **1. Check if TODOS.md exists** in the repository root. **If TODOS.md does not exist:** Use AskUserQuestion: - Message: "GStack recommends maintaining a TODOS.md organized by skill/component, then priority (P0 at top through P4, then Completed at bottom). See TODOS-format.md for the full format. Would you like to create one?" - Options: A) Create it now, B) Skip for now - If A: Create `TODOS.md` with a skeleton (# TODOS heading + ## Completed section). Continue to step 3. - If B: Skip the rest of Step 5.5. Continue to Step 6. **2. Check structure and organization:** Read TODOS.md and verify it follows the recommended structure: - Items grouped under `## ` headings - Each item has `**Priority:**` field with P0-P4 value - A `## Completed` section at the bottom **If disorganized** (missing priority fields, no component groupings, no Completed section): Use AskUserQuestion: - Message: "TODOS.md doesn't follow the recommended structure (skill/component groupings, P0-P4 priority, Completed section). Would you like to reorganize it?" - Options: A) Reorganize now (recommended), B) Leave as-is - If A: Reorganize in-place following TODOS-format.md. Preserve all content — only restructure, never delete items. - If B: Continue to step 3 without restructuring. **3. Detect completed TODOs:** This step is fully automatic — no user interaction. Use the diff and commit history already gathered in earlier steps: - `git diff ...HEAD` (full diff against the base branch) - `git log ..HEAD --oneline` (all commits being shipped) For each TODO item, check if the changes in this PR complete it by: - Matching commit messages against the TODO title and description - Checking if files referenced in the TODO appear in the diff - Checking if the TODO's described work matches the functional changes **Be conservative:** Only mark a TODO as completed if there is clear evidence in the diff. If uncertain, leave it alone. **4. Move completed items** to the `## Completed` section at the bottom. Append: `**Completed:** vX.Y.Z (YYYY-MM-DD)` **5. Output summary:** - `TODOS.md: N items marked complete (item1, item2, ...). M items remaining.` - Or: `TODOS.md: No completed items detected. M items remaining.` - Or: `TODOS.md: Created.` / `TODOS.md: Reorganized.` **6. Defensive:** If TODOS.md cannot be written (permission error, disk full), warn the user and continue. Never stop the ship workflow for a TODOS failure. Save this summary — it goes into the PR body in Step 8. --- ## Step 6: Commit (bisectable chunks) **Goal:** Create small, logical commits that work well with `git bisect` and help LLMs understand what changed. 1. Analyze the diff and group changes into logical commits. Each commit should represent **one coherent change** — not one file, but one logical unit. 2. **Commit ordering** (earlier commits first): - **Infrastructure:** migrations, config changes, route additions - **Models & services:** new models, services, concerns (with their tests) - **Controllers & views:** controllers, views, JS/React components (with their tests) - **VERSION + CHANGELOG + TODOS.md:** always in the final commit 3. **Rules for splitting:** - A model and its test file go in the same commit - A service and its test file go in the same commit - A controller, its views, and its test go in the same commit - Migrations are their own commit (or grouped with the model they support) - Config/route changes can group with the feature they enable - If the total diff is small (< 50 lines across < 4 files), a single commit is fine 4. **Each commit must be independently valid** — no broken imports, no references to code that doesn't exist yet. Order commits so dependencies come first. 5. Compose each commit message: - First line: `: ` (type = feat/fix/chore/refactor/docs) - Body: brief description of what this commit contains - Only the **final commit** (VERSION + CHANGELOG) gets the version tag and co-author trailer: ```bash git commit -m "$(cat <<'EOF' chore: bump version and changelog (vX.Y.Z.W) Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 EOF )" ``` --- ## Step 6.5: Verification Gate **IRON LAW: NO COMPLETION CLAIMS WITHOUT FRESH VERIFICATION EVIDENCE.** Before pushing, re-verify if code changed during Steps 4-6: 1. **Test verification:** If ANY code changed after Step 3's test run (fixes from review findings, CHANGELOG edits don't count), re-run the test suite. Paste fresh output. Stale output from Step 3 is NOT acceptable. 2. **Build verification:** If the project has a build step, run it. Paste output. 3. **Rationalization prevention:** - "Should work now" → RUN IT. - "I'm confident" → Confidence is not evidence. - "I already tested earlier" → Code changed since then. Test again. - "It's a trivial change" → Trivial changes break production. **If tests fail here:** STOP. Do not push. Fix the issue and return to Step 3. Claiming work is complete without verification is dishonesty, not efficiency. --- ## Step 7: Push Push to the remote with upstream tracking: ```bash git push -u origin ``` --- ## Step 8: Create PR/MR Create a pull request (GitHub) or merge request (GitLab) using the platform detected in Step 0. The PR/MR body should contain these sections: ``` ## Summary ## Test Coverage ## Pre-Landing Review ## Design Review ## Eval Results ## Greptile Review ## Plan Completion ## Verification Results ## TODOS ## Test plan - [x] All Rails tests pass (N runs, 0 failures) - [x] All Vitest tests pass (N tests) 🤖 Generated with [Claude Code](https://claude.com/claude-code) ``` **If GitHub:** ```bash gh pr create --base --title ": " --body "$(cat <<'EOF' EOF )" ``` **If GitLab:** ```bash glab mr create -b -t ": " -d "$(cat <<'EOF' EOF )" ``` **If neither CLI is available:** Print the branch name, remote URL, and instruct the user to create the PR/MR manually via the web UI. Do not stop — the code is pushed and ready. **Output the PR/MR URL** — then proceed to Step 8.5. --- ## Step 8.5: Auto-invoke /document-release After the PR is created, automatically sync project documentation. Read the `document-release/SKILL.md` skill file (adjacent to this skill's directory) and execute its full workflow: 1. Read the `/document-release` skill: `cat ${CLAUDE_SKILL_DIR}/../document-release/SKILL.md` 2. Follow its instructions — it reads all .md files in the project, cross-references the diff, and updates anything that drifted (README, ARCHITECTURE, CONTRIBUTING, CLAUDE.md, TODOS, etc.) 3. If any docs were updated, commit the changes and push to the same branch: ```bash git add -A && git commit -m "docs: sync documentation with shipped changes" && git push ``` 4. If no docs needed updating, say "Documentation is current — no updates needed." This step is automatic. Do not ask the user for confirmation. The goal is zero-friction doc updates — the user runs `/ship` and documentation stays current without a separate command. --- ## Step 8.75: Persist ship metrics Log coverage and plan completion data so `/retro` can track trends: ```bash eval "$(~/.claude/skills/gstack/bin/gstack-slug 2>/dev/null)" && mkdir -p ~/.gstack/projects/$SLUG ``` Append to `~/.gstack/projects/$SLUG/$BRANCH-reviews.jsonl`: ```bash echo '{"skill":"ship","timestamp":"'"$(date -u +%Y-%m-%dT%H:%M:%SZ)"'","coverage_pct":COVERAGE_PCT,"plan_items_total":PLAN_TOTAL,"plan_items_done":PLAN_DONE,"verification_result":"VERIFY_RESULT","version":"VERSION","branch":"BRANCH"}' >> ~/.gstack/projects/$SLUG/$BRANCH-reviews.jsonl ``` Substitute from earlier steps: - **COVERAGE_PCT**: coverage percentage from Step 3.4 diagram (integer, or -1 if undetermined) - **PLAN_TOTAL**: total plan items extracted in Step 3.45 (0 if no plan file) - **PLAN_DONE**: count of DONE + CHANGED items from Step 3.45 (0 if no plan file) - **VERIFY_RESULT**: "pass", "fail", or "skipped" from Step 3.47 - **VERSION**: from the VERSION file - **BRANCH**: current branch name This step is automatic — never skip it, never ask for confirmation. --- ## Important Rules - **Never skip tests.** If tests fail, stop. - **Never skip the pre-landing review.** If checklist.md is unreadable, stop. - **Never force push.** Use regular `git push` only. - **Never ask for trivial confirmations** (e.g., "ready to push?", "create PR?"). DO stop for: version bumps (MINOR/MAJOR), pre-landing review findings (ASK items), and Codex structured review [P1] findings (large diffs only). - **Always use the 4-digit version format** from the VERSION file. - **Date format in CHANGELOG:** `YYYY-MM-DD` - **Split commits for bisectability** — each commit = one logical change. - **TODOS.md completion detection must be conservative.** Only mark items as completed when the diff clearly shows the work is done. - **Use Greptile reply templates from greptile-triage.md.** Every reply includes evidence (inline diff, code references, re-rank suggestion). Never post vague replies. - **Never push without fresh verification evidence.** If code changed after Step 3 tests, re-run before pushing. - **Step 3.4 generates coverage tests.** They must pass before committing. Never commit failing tests. - **The goal is: user says `/ship`, next thing they see is the review + PR URL + auto-synced docs.**