release-readiness-reviewer

name	release-readiness-reviewer
description	Describe what this skill helps an agent do.
version	0.1.0
since	2026-07-28
last_modified	2026-07-28
authors	["platform-engineering"]
stability	experimental
min_platform_version	{"codex":"unknown","amazon-q":"unknown","antigravity":"unknown","auggie":"unknown","bob":"unknown","claude-code":"unknown","cline":"unknown","codebuddy":"unknown","continue":"unknown","costrict":"unknown","crush":"unknown","github-copilot":"unknown","gitlab-duo":"unknown","factory":"unknown","forgecode":"unknown","opencode":"unknown","openhands":"unknown","cursor":"unknown","roo-code":"unknown","kiro":"unknown","junie":"unknown","gemini-cli":"unknown","iflow":"unknown","kilocode":"unknown","kimi":"unknown","lingma":"unknown","pi":"unknown","qoder":"unknown","qwen":"unknown","windsurf":"unknown","ollama":"unknown"}
deprecated_since	null
replaces	null
supersedes	[]
changelog	[{"version":"0.1.0","date":"2026-07-28","change":"Initial generated production-ready SDLC / DevSecOps skill"}]

Release Readiness Reviewer

Purpose

Determine whether a change or system is ready for release by reviewing test status, security findings, known issues, rollback, migrations, monitoring, alerts, runbooks, feature flags, approvals, release notes, support readiness, and go/no-go recommendation.

When to use

• A release, deployment, version bump, migration, or production rollout needs go/no-go review.
• Known issues, security findings, rollback, monitoring, or support readiness are unclear.
• Feature flags, staged rollout, or compatibility risk must be assessed.
• Release notes, approvals, or operational ownership need validation.
• The central agent routes to release readiness review.

Operating model

1. Collect release scope, changed artifacts, validation status, deployment plan, and owners.
2. Evaluate blockers across tests, security, migrations, rollback, monitoring, docs, support, and approvals.
3. Separate go/no-go criteria from follow-up work and known accepted risks.
4. Assess rollout strategy, feature flags, blast radius, and recovery time.
5. Return go, conditional go, or no-go with explicit blockers.

Spec-Driven Change Context

• Treat repository specs, ADRs, runbooks, change proposals, design notes, and task files as durable context that outlives a chat session.
• For non-trivial changes, prefer a checked-in change artifact or equivalent proposal/design/tasks record before implementation begins.
• Capture requirement deltas explicitly: added, modified, removed, deprecated, or unchanged behavior.
• Keep implementation tasks traceable to acceptance criteria, affected specs, validation commands, and owners.
• During verification, compare the implementation against the proposal, design decisions, task checklist, and spec deltas.
• After completion, sync or archive completed change artifacts so the repository's source of truth reflects the final behavior.
• If the repository has no spec workflow yet, report the missing artifact and provide a minimal proposal/spec/tasks outline instead of relying on chat-only intent.

Skill-Specific Review Scope

• Test status, validation evidence, security findings, and known issues.
• Rollback, migrations, compatibility, feature flags, and staged rollout.
• Monitoring, alerts, runbooks, support readiness, and ownership.
• Approvals, release notes, communication, and go/no-go decision.
• Blockers, exceptions, residual risk, and follow-up actions.

Skill-Specific Checklist

• Verify required tests, builds, scans, migrations, and smoke checks are complete.