workflow-feature-shipper

Use when you need to ship a single PR-sized feature end-to-end (plan -> implement -> verify) with artifacts. Ship core product features quickly in a Next.js codebase: turn a feature idea into an executable plan, implement in PR-sized slices, and keep artifacts under runs/ (or OpenSpec changes/ when available). Supports plan-only mode for early scoping. For prototype UI work, include a demo-ready wow moment (animation/micro-interaction) by default unless user opts out.

Safety Notice

This listing is imported from skills.sh public index metadata. Review upstream SKILL.md and repository scripts before running.

Copy this and send it to your AI assistant to learn

Install skill "workflow-feature-shipper" with this command: npx skills add heyvhuang/ship-faster/heyvhuang-ship-faster-workflow-feature-shipper

Feature Shipper

Turn "I want to build a feature" into a fast execution chain.

Input (Pass Paths Only)

  • feature.md: Requirements description (acceptance criteria + non-goals)
  • repo_root
  • run_dir

Optional flags (recommended inside feature.md)

  • mode: plan-only | execute (default: execute)
  • feature_slug: short slug for artifact naming (default: derived from title + timestamp)
  • quality_bar: demo-ready | functional-only (default: demo-ready for user-facing UI features)

Output (Persisted)

  • evidence/features/<feature_slug>-plan.md (checklist plan: tasks + verification)
  • evidence/parallel/features/<feature_slug>/ (if implementation is split)
  • evidence/features/<feature_slug>-summary.md

Process

  1. Hooks doctor (required check; non-blocking): Run tool-hooks-doctor once at the start of the session to verify skill-evolution hooks are enabled. If missing, offer to install project-level hooks; continue either way.
  2. Read feature.md, normalize into: acceptance criteria, boundaries, risks, rollback.
  3. Prototype UI rule (default): if this feature affects user-facing UI and quality_bar isn’t functional-only, propose 1 “demo moment” (animation/micro-interaction) and add it to acceptance criteria. Must respect prefers-reduced-motion.
  4. Produce 2 options (A: minimal; B: cleaner but slower), default to A. If user cares about “demo feel”, offer A-demo-ready vs A-functional-only as explicit sub-options.
  5. Split into PR-sized small steps (each independently runnable + rollback-able).
  6. Write plan to evidence/features/<feature_slug>-plan.md.
  7. If mode: plan-only, stop here and ask for confirmation before implementing.
  8. Implement (batch execution + checkpoints):
    • UI visual/layout/animation changes → First call tool-design-style-selector to load the project’s design-system.md, then strictly follow it. If tool-ui-ux-pro-max is installed, use it to ground motion/UX constraints (search “animation” + “accessibility”). For complex visual/animation/responsive design, delegate to /gemini frontend UI/UX senior design agent.
    • Business logic/data flow/integration → Implement directly.
    • Default batch rhythm: 3 small tasks per batch → run verification → report and wait for feedback; stop immediately for help when blocked/verification fails.
    • After each batch (or before merge), recommend using review-quality for a conclusive review + verdict.
      • review-quality is the single entry point and will auto-triage: if React/Next.js performance risk is detected, it will also run review-react-best-practices.
      • If the user explicitly wants only a React/Next.js perf audit, run review-react-best-practices directly.
  9. Verification: can run, can build (and existing tests pass).
    • If verification fails (tests/build/runtime error): run tool-systematic-debugging before attempting more fixes.
    • Persist debugging artifacts to:
      • evidence/features/<feature_slug>-debug.md (repro steps, hypotheses, root cause, fix + re-verify)
  10. Write evidence/features/<feature_slug>-summary.md: what was done, how verified, next steps.
  11. Wrap up: Do a skill-evolution Evolution checkpoint (3 questions); if user chooses "want to optimize", run skill-improver based on this run_dir to produce minimal patch suggestions

Delivery Requirements

  • No "big bang" refactoring
  • Don't introduce new complexity (unless it significantly reduces future cost, and user confirms)

Source Transparency

This detail page is rendered from real SKILL.md content. Trust labels are metadata-based hints, not a safety guarantee.

Related Skills

Related by shared tags or category signals.

Coding

review-clean-code

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
Coding

tool-programmatic-seo

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
General

tool-openclaw

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review
General

mcp-supabase

No summary provided by upstream source.

Repository SourceNeeds Review