launch-review — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited launch-review (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
A structured, multi-phase agent pipeline that evaluates feature readiness through adversarial debate, creates a reviewed action plan, and executes fixes. Each phase runs as an isolated team to prevent context bloat.
/launch-review [topic] [--scope "focus areas"] [--constraints "known constraints"]Examples:
/launch-review "checkout experience" --scope "cart, payment, confirmation"/launch-review "v2 API launch" --constraints "backwards compatible, feature flag gated"Before spawning any agents, the main agent MUST:
Format:
CONSTRAINTS (non-negotiable):
- [constraint 1]
- [constraint 2]
DO NOT propose solutions that violate these constraints.This phase prevents the #1 failure mode: agents recommending something that's already been ruled out.
Create team: TeamCreate with name {topic}-debate
Agents (5):
| Agent | Role | Type |
|---|---|---|
arch-critic | Code auditor -- finds gaps, bugs, half-baked features | general-purpose |
comp-critic | Competitive benchmarker -- researches competitors, holds us to that bar | general-purpose |
code-defender | Argues launch readiness from actual code evidence | general-purpose |
industry-defender | Argues competitive positioning from market research | general-purpose |
moderator | Synthesizes all 4 reports, writes verdict | general-purpose |
Flow:
moderator via SendMessage.docs/{TOPIC}_READINESS_REPORT.md.team-lead.Handoff artifact: docs/{TOPIC}_READINESS_REPORT.md
Team transition checklist:
TeamDeleteCreate team: TeamCreate with name {topic}-planning
Agents (2):
| Agent | Role | Type |
|---|---|---|
planner | Reads report, creates action plan with team structure | general-purpose |
reviewer | Audits plan against code, verifies file references, checks for gaps | general-purpose |
Flow:
planner first. It reads the report from disk, creates docs/{TOPIC}_ACTION_PLAN.md.reviewer.team-lead.The plan MUST include:
Handoff artifact: docs/{TOPIC}_ACTION_PLAN.md (with review section)
Team transition checklist:
TeamDeleteCreate team: TeamCreate with name {topic}-execution
Agents: Per the plan's team structure. Typically:
Critical rules:
Every code-writing agent must git add + git commit in their worktree before reporting done. Uncommitted worktree changes are lost on cleanup.
Before TeamDelete, a merge agent MUST:
git worktree listgit worktree prunegit status is cleanNEVER call TeamDelete while worktrees contain unmerged work.
If an agent fails or auth drops:
Handoff artifact: Clean main branch with all fixes merged.
Main agent writes docs/{TOPIC}_BACKLOG.md capturing:
addBlockedBy on tasks to enforce sequencing.~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.