blast-radius

A code-review method for finding what a proposed change might break outside the lines that were edited, then checking the key safety assumptions by running code.

In plain words
What is it for?
It is for investigating a change’s blast radius, reviewing a questionable diff, and testing the facts that determine whether the change is safe.
Why use it?
A small change can affect callers, integrations, or behaviours that a normal diff does not reveal. This method focuses on proving whether those risks are real.

Skill for Claude CodeCodex

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.

agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/painhardcore/pstack/blast-radius
Any agent
npx skills add painhardcore/pstack --skill blast-radius
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/painhardcore/pstack

Made for: Claude Code, Codex.

Per session 61 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 960 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. Scan, not verified.
Origin 94% 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 $0.00061 $0.00960
Opus 5 $0.00030 $0.00480
Sonnet 5 $0.00012 $0.00192
Haiku 4.5 $0.00006 $0.00096

Measured yesterday against content hash 00464891e7f0, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-08-30, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

blast-radius 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 yesterday.

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

94% identical to blast-radius — 1 line 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.

.opencode/skills/blast-radius/SKILL.md · 50 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 50 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.

Companion to how and why. how tells you what the code does. why tells you why it's shaped that way. Blast radius tells you what it breaks somewhere else.

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. Use why step 2 to pull the PR and commits.
  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 rules as why. 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, run it as an arena. Ask several models the same question and merge the answers. Different models catch different real bugs.

Read the full file on GitHub · 50 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. yesterday First seen · 50 lines · 61 tokens per session scan A 00464891e7f0

Subscribe to this mod's changes

blast-radius is a skill published in the GitHub repository painhardcore/pstack (1 stars, last pushed 5d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 61 tokens to every session and 960 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 94% identical to blast-radius, differing in 1 line, and is treated as a copy.

Related

Other skills, from other repositories

skill-authoring

Author SKILL.md skills: frontmatter, validator limits, structure.

mateaix/mateclaw · 18 tokens

iflytek-hyper-tts

Use when user asks to synthesize speech, convert text to audio, or read text aloud. 讯飞超拟人语音合成 - 支持文本转语音、语音合成(发音人/语速/语调/音量/输出格式)。大模型语音合成技能。语音合成, 文字转语音, 超拟人, TTS.

iflytek/iFly-Skills · 92 tokens

iflytek-ocr-invoice

Use when user asks to recognize invoices, extract receipt data, or OCR bills and tickets. Recognize and extract structured data from invoices, receipts, and bills using iFlytek OCR API (科大讯飞票据识别). Supports VAT invoices, taxi receipts, train tickets, toll invoices, medical bills, bank receipts, and more.

iflytek/iFly-Skills · 77 tokens

iflytek-pdf-image-ocr

AI-powered OCR service for images and PDF documents using iFlytek's advanced recognition APIs.

iflytek/iFly-Skills · 81 tokens

iflytek-voiceclone-tts

Use when user asks to clone a voice, train a custom voice model, or synthesize speech with a cloned voice. iFlytek Voice Clone tts(声音复刻) — train a custom voice model from audio samples and synthesize speech with the cloned voice. Supports the full workflow: get training text → create task → upload audio → submit…

iflytek/iFly-Skills · 99 tokens

animated-sketch-diagram

生成"黑墨手绘涂鸦"风格的动画架构图/流程图:米色纸面、针管笔墨线、极淡水洗色块、简笔涂鸦图标、序号章、连线上的流动圆点动画、图标微动效。产出单文件自包含动画 HTML(SVG+CSS),可一键导出无缝循环 GIF。当用户想画架构图、流程图、信息图、技术示意图、对比图、pipeline/workflow 可视化,或提到"手绘风""涂鸦风""动图""animated diagram""GIF 架构图"时使用;即使用户没明说要动画,做技术概念科普配图时也应优先考虑本 skill。.

iflytek/iFly-Skills · 182 tokens