agentleFS
Sign inStart free
myshra777-aimyshra777-ai/garuda/skills/change-impact/SKILL.md

change-impact

Skill4 starsChanged 13 days agoApache-2.0View on GitHub

Use before changing a function, interface, package or file, or when asked what breaks if something changes, who calls a symbol, or how risky an edit is. Garuda resolves the exact symbol, then reports its direct callers, transitive blast radius, the call chains that reach it, whether tests cover it and its callers, and which ADRs or policies govern it. It assigns a criticality tier so high fan-in hubs are flagged for human review before any AI agent touches them. It can also assess the combined impact of every currently modified file in a git diff. Results come from the indexed code graph, not from model guesses. Read-only by default.

7 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

1 rule. 0 are common, 0 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 5 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 0

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 1

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Very specific:

    Epistemic States: Always distinguish SUPPORTED (backed by compiler/AST + runtime evidence where required), UNVERIFIED (statically …

    line 37

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 5 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

02 — Garuda Change Impact Analysis

Calculates direct callers, transitive blast radius, criticality tier, and governing ADRs/policies before modifying any symbol or package.

1. Purpose & Triggers

Invoke this skill when the user or coding workflow asks:

  • "What breaks if I change this function or interface?"
  • "Assess the blast radius before editing"
  • "Who calls this symbol across the workspace?"

2. Required Context

  • workspace: Target Garuda workspace name (default: "default").
  • repo_dir: Repository root path (default: ".").
  • diff / target: Git revision range (e.g. "HEAD") or symbol/package name.

3. Ordered MCP Workflow

  1. garuda.find_entity — Resolve the exact target symbol ID, package, file path, and signature.
  2. garuda.blast_radius — Compute transitive callers and severity distribution (CRITICAL, HIGH, MEDIUM, LOW) up to depth 3–5.
  3. garuda.call_chain — Trace concrete caller-to-callee execution paths.
  4. garuda.symbol_test_coverage — Check whether unit or integration tests cover the target symbol and its callers.
  5. garuda.diff_impact — Evaluate the combined impact of all currently modified files.

CLI Fallback (when MCP stdio is not attached):

garuda talon brief <SymbolOrFile> --json

4. Decision & Epistemic Rules

  • Epistemic States: Always distinguish SUPPORTED (backed by compiler/AST + runtime evidence where required), UNVERIFIED (statically extracted, awaiting runtime trace), and CONTRADICTED (violates ADR, policy, or static boundary).
  • Governance Verdicts: ALLOW (proceed), WARN (proceed with note), REVIEW (requires human architectural review), BLOCK (halt and remediate net-new violation), INCONCLUSIVE (0 entities matched policy scope; never treat as vacuous ALLOW).

5. Output Contract

Format every report using this six-part structure: Finding -> Evidence (file:line & match_method) -> Affected Components (callers & tier) -> Policy / ADR -> Confidence / Status -> Recommended Action

6. Safety & Limitations

  • Read-Only by Default: Public installations run with GARUDA_MCP_READ_ONLY=true. Never invoke mutating tools (garuda.approve_base_rulebook, garuda.decide_logic_variant, garuda.reconcile_data_audit) without explicit human authorization (GARUDA_MCP_APPROVER).
  • Scope Qualification: RFC 6962 Merkle proofs (H_leaf = SHA256(0x00 || data)) establish tamper-evident integrity and inclusion of recorded governance evaluations; they do not replace unit, integration, or dynamic security testing.

Download now (ZIP)

Does it work?

Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.

No reviews yet

People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.

  • It worked
  • Partly
  • It didn't
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.

Your trail

Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.

Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.

Now do this for your own.

Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.

Check your setup, free