agentleFS
oaustegardoaustegard/claude-skills/assessing-impact/SKILL.md

assessing-impact

Skill158 starsChanged 8 months agoMITView on GitHub

Pre-change blast-radius report for a symbol or file. Walks tree-sitting references, augments with a plain-text scan over non-parsed files (configs, plain docs), and clusters affected sites by feature (`_FEATURES.md`) or top-level package. Use when about to refactor, rename, or delete something in a repo you don't own — "what breaks if I change `validateUser`", "who calls this", "is this safe to remove", "where is this used", "blast radius", "impact analysis". This is the CONVERGENT pre-change risk skill — for "what is this repo?" use exploring-codebases; for "where is X?" use searching-codebases.

  • Installs packages

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

4 rules. About 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 3 are very specific to this project.

  • ≈0

    Common · estimate

    Many files like this have a rule of this kind.

  • ≈1

    Distinctive · estimate

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 3

    Very specific

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

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Test refs present (good — the change has a verification surface) vs.

    line 66
  2. Very specific:

    If a particular package looks suspicious, follow up with tree-sitting to read the actual call sites:

    line 72
  3. Very specific:

    Run after exploring-codebases: if the repo also has a freshly generated _FEATURES.md — the impact report will cluster refs by feature, …

    line 116
  4. Very specific:

    Use searching-codebases: when you want regex/AST search over the same corpus rather than impact analysis on a known target.

    line 122

≈ “Common” is an estimate: at least 1 in 5 of the 350,495 skill files we read have a rule of the same kind, not the same words. “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

Assessing Impact

Cheap, ad-hoc impact analysis for a single target. Not a graph database — a focused walk over an AST cache plus a complementary text scan, clustered into a report that's easy to summarize.

Use this when you're about to refactor / rename / delete a symbol in a repo you don't work in daily, and you want a single artifact that says: "these N files will need to change, in these M packages, with these tests likely affected."

Don't use this for deep ongoing impact analysis on your own codebase — stand up GitNexus, SourceGraph, or your IDE's index. This skill is for the one-shot case.

Setup

uv venv /home/claude/.venv 2>/dev/null
uv pip install --python /home/claude/.venv/bin/python tree-sitter
export PYTHON=/home/claude/.venv/bin/python
export IMPACT=/mnt/skills/user/assessing-impact/scripts/impact.py

The script depends on the tree-sitting skill — it imports engine.py directly. The bundled grammars live with tree-sitting; no separate language-pack install needed.

Workflow

1. Run the report

$PYTHON $IMPACT /path/to/repo SYMBOL_NAME

Or target a whole file:

$PYTHON $IMPACT /path/to/repo path/to/module.py

2. Read the data, write the summary

The script prints a structured markdown report. Treat it as input for your final summary, not the deliverable. It deliberately doesn't assign a "high/medium/low" risk label — that's your job, after weighing:

  • Refs concentrated in one package (low blast) vs. fanned across many (high)
  • Test refs present (good — the change has a verification surface) vs. absent
  • Doc mentions (renames need to update docs too)
  • Caveats listed at the bottom (what the script can't see)

3. Drill if needed

If a particular package looks suspicious, follow up with tree-sitting to read the actual call sites:

TREESIT=/mnt/skills/user/tree-sitting/scripts/treesit.py
$PYTHON $TREESIT /path/to/repo --no-tree 'source:caller_function'

Options

FlagDefaultPurpose
--features PATH_FEATURES.mdRoot _FEATURES.md — when present, refs get clustered by feature in addition to by package.
--skip DIRS(defaults from tree-sitting)Extra comma-separated dirs to skip.
--limit-per-name N500Cap refs per symbol name. Bump if you suspect truncation.
--jsonoffEmit JSON instead of markdown — for downstream tooling.

Output Sections

# Impact Report: <target>

## Target
  Kind, definition sites with line ranges.

## Direct & Textual References (N total)
  Top-line counts, then refs grouped by:
  - Code references by package
  - Test references
  - Documentation mentions

## Affected Features (from _FEATURES.md)        ← only if file present
  Feature name → ref count + file count.

## Suggested Test Surfaces
  Test files that already reference the target, plus tests neighboring
  the definition. Likely the regression net for the change.

## Caveats
  What the scan can't see (dynamic dispatch, cross-language, cross-repo).

Composition with Other Skills

  • Run after exploring-codebases if the repo also has a freshly generated _FEATURES.md — the impact report will cluster refs by feature, which makes the blast radius story much more legible than raw package directories.
  • Use tree-sitting to drill specific call sites once impact has identified them.
  • Use searching-codebases when you want regex/AST search over the same corpus rather than impact analysis on a known target.

Honest Limits

  • Text-based ref discovery. Refs are matched by symbol name, not by type-resolved call edges. Common names (run, init, handler) will pick up unrelated symbols. Prefer running this on distinctive names; otherwise expect noise and read the snippets.
  • No type/MRO resolution. Dynamic dispatch (getattr, duck-typed method calls, virtual dispatch in C++) is missed or over-matched.
  • No cross-language tracing. A TS frontend calling a Python backend handler over HTTP appears as zero refs — they're not in the same AST.
  • No cross-repo tracing. Consumers in separate repos (downstream packages, sibling services) are invisible. For multi-repo impact, reach for GitNexus / SourceGraph.
  • No persistent index. Each run re-scans. Fine for single-shot use; acceptable cost (~700ms scan + sub-ms queries) for a few hundred files.
  • Diff input not yet supported. v0.1 takes a symbol or file path. Diff → affected-symbols extraction is a planned follow-up.

Files

  • scripts/impact.py — Single-entry CLI. Resolves target → walks AST refs → augments with text scan → clusters by package and (optionally) by feature → renders markdown or JSON.

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.