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.
npx skills add me-cedric/agent-compass --skill impact-analysisgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/me-cedric/agent-compassWrote 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.
[](https://agentmods.dev/skills/me-cedric/agent-compass/impact-analysis)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/me-cedric/agent-compass/impact-analysis"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/me-cedric/agent-compass/impact-analysis/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.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/me-cedric/agent-compass/impact-analysis"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/me-cedric/agent-compass/impact-analysis.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>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.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00044 | $0.00914 |
| Opus 5.5 | $0.00018 | $0.00366 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $0.00009 | $0.00183 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00004 | $0.00091 |
Grade A, and why
impact-analysis 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 10d 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 98 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
impact-analysis
Answer one question: given what changed, what else must change?
This is the developer half of the delivery flow. delivery-digest is the Product Owner half. Never mix the two in one file.
Read the change
git diff --stat <base>...HEAD
git status --short
git diff <base>
Ask the user for <base> when it is missing. A guessed base makes every number wrong.
Never claim an impact that you did not confirm in the file. A grep hit is a lead, not a finding.
Seven axes
Walk all seven. Write None. for an empty axis. A silent axis reads as "not checked".
- Behavior: what a user or caller can now do, or can no longer do. A breaking change gets its own line.
- Contracts: routes, methods, status codes, payloads, DTOs, shared types, events, queue messages. Each consumer of a changed contract is an impact. See
api-contract-sync. - Data: schema, migrations, backfills, indexes, retention. Say if the migration is reversible.
- Configuration: env vars, flags, secrets, infrastructure values. An added variable lands on every surface: the validation schema,
.env.exampleand the deployment config. - Security and privacy: authn and authz, ownership checks on by-id paths, input validation, injection surface, sensitive logging, new dependencies.
- Operations: build, CI, deployment order, rollback path, and a signal for each new failure mode.
- Delivery documents: the table below.
Documents to check
For each document write up to date, stale with the change to make, or not affected.
| Document | Location | Stale when |
|---|---|---|
| Specs | {{OPENSPEC_DIR}} |
Behavior changed or a requirement is now built |
| Decisions | {{ADR_DIR}} |
A choice was made or reversed and no ADR records it |
| API contracts | {{OPENAPI_DIR}} and the request collection |
A route, payload, status code or auth rule moved |
| Data models | {{DATA_MODELS_DIR}} |
A table, column, relation or enum changed |
| Diagrams | {{DIAGRAMS_DIR}} |
A component or dependency appeared or vanished |
| Network flows | {{FLOWS_FILE}} |
A new port, protocol, source or destination is needed |
| Designs | {{DESIGNS_DIR}} |
Tokens, components or UI rules changed |
| Assignments | {{DELIVERY_DIR}}/assignments.json |
Scope moved between profiles or a gate cleared |
| Module docs | **/README.md, **/DESIGN.md |
A module's public API, files or configuration changed |
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.
- 10d ago Changed · -52 lines · -28 tokens per session 8d601d39cd70
- 1mo ago First seen · 150 lines · 72 tokens per session scan A 47cd068432f6
impact-analysis is a skill published in the GitHub repository me-cedric/agent-compass (3 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 44 tokens to every session and 914 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5.5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
Other skills, from other repositories
agent-code-analyzer
Agent skill for code-analyzer - invoke with $agent-code-analyzer.
pr-review-triage
Watch open PRs, check CI status, review staleness, merge conflicts, and unanswered review comments. Produces a prioritized watchlist.
learn-from-sage
Detection-gap (miss) analysis for Code Review Sage. Learn from shipped fixes, acted-on human comments, and design outcomes to close reviewer blind spots. Inline during review stages a candidate; a human triggers a one-shot AI consolidation into the live ruleset.
make-pr-easy-to-review
Prepare PRs for review by cleaning noisy history, improving PR descriptions, and adding reviewer guidance without changing code behavior. Use for "make this easy to review", "tidy this PR", "clean up commits", or "annotate the diff".
thermo-nuclear-code-quality-review
Run an extremely strict maintainability review for abstraction quality, giant files, and spaghetti-condition growth. Use for a thermo-nuclear code quality review, thermonuclear review, deep code quality audit, or especially harsh maintainability review.
code-quality
Drive static-analysis code quality in pi-agent-dashboard with Biome (analyze → fix → test), in changed-files or whole-repo mode. Use when asked to "improve code quality", "lint and fix", "clean up warnings", "fix Biome issues", "run static analysis", or when setting a code-quality goal. Skip for one-line edits.