# Wire the performance audit into the pipeline with a budget per route

Budgets per route enforced in the pipeline, so a regression fails a check instead of reaching users.

Category: Audits and budgets
Source: https://letsship.ai/use-cases/wire-a-performance-budget-per-route
Published: 2026-08-25

## Goal

Enforce a per-route performance budget in the pipeline.

## Acceptance criteria

- Each covered route has a stated budget with a rationale
- A seeded regression fails the check
- Measurements are repeatable enough not to flap
- Raising a budget requires a reviewed change

## What lands as proof

A seeded regression failing, plus repeated runs showing the measurement is stable.

## Prompt

Copy this to an agent to open the ticket:

```text
Create a Linear issue in my team and assign it to the SHIP agent.

Title: Add per-route performance budgets

Description: Enforce a per-route performance budget in the pipeline.

Acceptance criteria:
- Each covered route has a stated budget with a rationale
- A seeded regression fails the check
- Measurements are repeatable enough not to flap
- Raising a budget requires a reviewed change

Before you create the issue, measure this repository's routes to establish current numbers and propose budgets in the description.
```

## Questions

### What does the agent actually change?

The ticket is scoped to one outcome: enforce a per-route performance budget in the pipeline. Work that serves that outcome is in scope, and anything outside it is left for a separate ticket, so the pull request stays reviewable.

### How do I know the work is done?

The pull request carries the evidence, not only the diff. Here that means the budget fails on a deliberately regressed route, so a reviewer can confirm the result without reproducing the work locally.

### How much oversight does this need?

The run stops for the plan, and the review bar is raised afterwards so that smaller suggestions block the merge too, not only serious findings.