blast-radius-skill

blast-radius-skill is a skill for Claude Code, Codex from darellchua2/opencode-config-template. It costs 48 tokens per session (1,049 once invoked), scanned A, a copy of blast-radius, Apache-2.0.

A five-step safety review for finding what a code change might break outside the changed files. This wider impact is called the change’s blast radius.

In plain words
What is it for?
Use it before shipping a change when you need to know what else could break. It traces possible failures, gathers evidence from code and libraries, and runs scripts or tests to verify key claims.
Why use it?
A list of affected callers is not always enough; the review looks for failures that ordinary text searches may miss and tests important safety claims with real code.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

Written for no agent in particular: nothing here depends on one. Also seen: mentions OpenCode.

Good fit Use it before shipping a change when you need to know what else could break. It traces possible failures, gathers evidence from code and libraries, and runs scripts or tests to verify key claims.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/darellchua2/opencode-config-template/blast-radius-skill
Install

Getting it into your agent

One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.

Any agent
npx skills add darellchua2/opencode-config-template --skill blast-radius-skill
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/darellchua2/opencode-config-template

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Wrote this? Show the measurements

A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.

agentmods badge for blast-radius-skill

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/darellchua2/opencode-config-template/blast-radius-skill/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/darellchua2/opencode-config-template/blast-radius-skill)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/darellchua2/opencode-config-template/blast-radius-skill"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/darellchua2/opencode-config-template/blast-radius-skill/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>

Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.

agentmods 80×15 button for blast-radius-skill

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/darellchua2/opencode-config-template/blast-radius-skill"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/darellchua2/opencode-config-template/blast-radius-skill.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 48 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 1,049 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin 86% copy Near-identical to another mod in the catalogue.
Token cost

What it costs to keep this loaded

Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00048 $0.01049
Opus 5.5 $0.00019 $0.00420
Sonnet 5.5 $0.00010 $0.00210
Haiku 4.5 $0.00005 $0.00105

Measured 1mo ago against content hash 0368fa8b7299, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-10-07, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

blast-radius-skill scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 1mo ago.

A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.

Nothing flagged

None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.

Origin

This is a copy

86% identical to blast-radius — 35 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.

skills/blast-radius-skill/SKILL.md · 59 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 59 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Blast radius

Find what a change breaks somewhere else, before it ships. Use for "blast radius of X", "what could this break", or reviewing a small diff you don't trust yet.

Listing the callers is not the job. The agent can grep those in a second. The job is the breakage grep won't show you.

Don't trust your own writeup

A blast-radius writeup that sounds right is worthless. It reads as convincing whether or not it's true, and that is the trap you are walking into. So don't hand back the writeup. Find the one or two facts the whole thing depends on and prove them by running code. Words are where you start, not what you ship.

How sure are you

For each fact the change's safety depends on, get it as far down this list as is cheap, and say where it stopped.

  1. You said so. Worthless on its own.
  2. You pointed at the line. A real file:line, or the library's own source.
  3. You showed the bad case can't happen. You walked the failure step by step and it doesn't reach.
  4. You ran it. A script or test that calls the real code and fails loud if you're wrong.
  5. You reproduced it in the running app.

Any safety fact you can't get to step 4, say so out loud. Don't write it up as settled. Step 4 is usually one small script that imports the same library the app ships and calls the exact function you're worried about.

Steps

  1. Read the change. The diff, the symbols it adds, changes, and deletes, and what it now does differently, including the part the diff doesn't spell out. Pull the PR and commits (gh pr view, git log).
  2. Find the one fact it's safe because of. Most changes that look scary are safe because of a single fact, like "this call only drops already-dead cache entries and does nothing else". Find that fact. If it holds, most of the scary cases die at once. Spend your time here, not on a long list of maybes.
  3. Look where grep stops. Read the source of the library you call, and check its pinned version and any local patch. Work out when things run: microtasks, unmount and teardown, Solid versus React. Follow what a symbol search misses: the JSON an API returns, a DB column, a wire format, another language reading the same bytes, a feature flag, code three hops downstream.
  4. Be honest about each risk. Give it a real chance of happening and a real cost if it does. Keep the risks you confirmed; list the ones you checked and cleared separately. Same standard of evidence. Cite a real file:line, a search that finds nothing is still an answer, and never make up a caller or an API.
  5. Prove the one fact. Write a script or test that runs the real code, run it, and paste what happened. If you can't prove it cheaply, mark it unproven. Don't round up.
  6. For a big or wide change, get a second independent review. Ask another model or reviewer the same question and merge the answers. Different models catch different real bugs.

Read the full file on GitHub · 59 lines

Changes

What this file has done since we first saw it

Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.

  1. 1mo ago First seen · 59 lines · 48 tokens per session scan A 0368fa8b7299

Subscribe to this mod's changes

blast-radius-skill is a skill published in the GitHub repository darellchua2/opencode-config-template (6 stars, last pushed 28d ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 48 tokens to every session and 1,049 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 86% identical to blast-radius, differing in 35 lines, and is treated as a copy.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

ai-development-guide

Applies language-agnostic and backend technical decision criteria, anti-pattern detection, debugging, and quality gates. Use when reviewing general/backend implementation choices, code smells, failures, or implementation completeness.

shinpr/claude-code-workflows · 43 tokens

dorodango

Polishes working code through successive quality passes in fresh subagents. Use after tests pass when code needs multi-dimension refinement before release.

athola/claude-night-market · 31 tokens

ring:searching-code

Forensic code search and analysis with optional Chain of Draft (CoD) ultra-concise mode. Five-phase methodology (clarification, planning, execution, analysis, synthesis) with severity assessment. Use for targeted investigation of specific patterns, bugs, or vulnerabilities. Skip for broad architecture mapping (use…

LerianStudio/ring · 74 tokens

ring:using-assert

Using lib-observability/assert, Lerian's runtime assertion package, in two modes. Sweep Mode detects panic()/log.Fatal zero-panic violations, DIY invariant checks, hand-rolled domain predicates, and missing InitAssertionMetrics. Reference Mode catalogs the asserter lifecycle, domain predicates, observability trident…

LerianStudio/ring · 99 tokens

ring:fixing-lint

Fixing lint to a clean state: runs the linter, groups reported issues into independent streams, and dispatches one parallel fixer agent per stream (ring:backend-go for Go, ring:general-purpose otherwise), iterating until clean. Use when a codebase has lint errors across multiple files. Skip for a single error (fix…

LerianStudio/ring · 96 tokens

ring:detecting-goroutine-leaks

Detecting goroutine leaks in Go: greps for goroutine patterns, audits goleak coverage (VerifyTestMain/VerifyNone), runs goleak, and dispatches ring:backend-go to fix leaks and add regression tests. Use after implementation or during review when code spawns goroutines or a leak is suspected. Runs before…

LerianStudio/ring · 109 tokens