blast-radius
Find what a code, schema, API, config, or behavior change could break beyond its visible diff, then prove the safety-critical assumption with real code. Use whenever the user asks what could break, requests a blast-radius review, or distrusts a deceptively small change.
- License 许可
- MIT
- 所属仓库
- caezium/skills
- 最近更新
- 2026-08-24
- Stars
- ★ 3
- Forks
- 0
01 前言 Front Matter
- name
- blast-radius
- description
- Find what a code, schema, API, config, or behavior change could break beyond its visible diff, then prove the safety-critical assumption with real code. Use whenever the user asks what could break, requests a blast-radius review, or distrusts a deceptively small change.
02 资源文件 1
- 许可证LICENSE1.0 KB
03 SKILL.md 正文
Blast radius
Find breakage a caller list will miss. The deliverable is not a convincing risk essay; it is the one safety-critical fact either proved against real behavior or marked unproven.
Evidence ladder
For every fact the change's safety depends on, climb as far as practical and report where you stopped:
- An unsupported assertion—never sufficient.
- A concrete
file:line, pinned dependency source, schema, or contract. - A traced bad case showing whether it can reach the changed behavior.
- A script or test that calls the real code and fails loudly if the fact is false.
- A reproduction through the running product.
Any safety fact below level 4 stays explicitly unproven.
Tool availability
| Need | Preferred route | Fallback |
|---|---|---|
| Change and history | Local git diff/log plus an available source-control connector | Local repository only; name missing PR context |
| Downstream consumers | Code search, schemas, generated clients, migrations, pinned dependency source | Trace the reachable local chain and mark external consumers unknown |
| Runtime proof | Existing tests, verification harness, or a small deterministic script | Minimal isolated repro; if execution is impossible, stop at the evidence level reached |
| Independent review | Invoke interrogate when the user authorizes a multi-agent review |
One lead-review pass; disclose the missing independent signal |
Process
- Read the change. Inspect the diff, changed symbols, deleted behavior, commits, and surrounding contracts. State what now behaves differently, including effects the diff does not spell out.
- Name the safety fact. Find the one or two assumptions that collapse most scary cases if true. Spend effort here instead of producing a long speculative list.
- Look past symbol search. Check pinned library behavior and local patches; event timing and teardown; serialized data, database columns, wire formats, other-language consumers, feature flags, jobs, caches, and code several hops downstream.
- Trace real risks. For each candidate, show a reachable failure path, likelihood, cost, and a concrete check. A search that finds nothing is evidence when the search scope is stated.
- Prove the safety fact. Prefer the smallest script or test importing the same code the product ships. Run it and retain output. Reproduce through the product when proportionate.
- Widen only when useful. For a broad or high-risk change, suggest
interrogate; do not launch agents unless current policy and user intent allow it.
Output contract
- What changed: the visible and implicit behavior change.
- Safety fact: the assumption, evidence level reached, and proof output; otherwise
UNPROVEN. - Risks: only reachable risks, each with location, likelihood, impact, and check.
- Cleared: candidates investigated and why they do not reach.
- Before merge: the cheapest test or repro that catches the real failure.
- Coverage gaps: unavailable repositories, services, connectors, or runtime paths.
Use plain language, cite real code, and remove private material before public sharing.
<!-- Adapted from poteto/pstack blast-radius, MIT License, Lauren Tan, cursor/plugins@51a96e0. -->
04 同仓库更多 Skills
writing-for-agents
Writing documents for agents. Use when creating or editing skills, or modifying AGENTS.md or CLAUDE.md.
wrangler
Cloudflare Workers CLI for deploying, developing, and managing Workers, KV, R2, D1, Vectorize, Hyperdrive, Workers AI, Containers, Queues, Workflows, Pipelines, and Secrets Store. Load before running wrangler commands to ensure correct syntax and best practices. Biases towards retrieval from Cloudflare docs over pre-trained knowledge.
workers-best-practices
Reviews and authors Cloudflare Workers code against production best practices. Load when writing new Workers, reviewing Worker code, configuring wrangler.jsonc, or checking for common Workers anti-patterns (streaming, floating promises, global state, secrets, bindings, observability). Biases towards retrieval from Cloudflare docs over pre-trained knowledge.
wizard
Generate an interactive bash wizard that walks a human through steps only they can perform. Use when provisioning infrastructure, setting up credentials or CI secrets, walking an unfamiliar third-party dashboard, or running a one-off migration or cutover. Don't invoke this for steps the agent can perform itself.
why
Use for 'why does X work this way', 'why we picked Y', design rationale, regressions, postmortems, or data-backed thresholds. Discovers available evidence sources, searches each relevant category, and returns a cited read on decisions and tradeoffs. Use how for runtime behavior.
week-prep
Generate a briefing with calendar, tasks, and attention flags. Use for "week prep", "briefing", or "what's on this week".