agentleFS
trac3r00trac3r00/agent-skills/skills/blindspot/SKILL.md

blindspot

Skill0 starsChanged 3 months agoMITView on GitHub

Read-only reconnaissance pass over an unfamiliar codebase, system, or feature area to surface hidden risks before any code is written. Use when starting work in unfamiliar territory, before a risky change, or when the user says "blindspot pass", "what am I missing", or "scan for risks".

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

3 rules. 0 are common, 1 is distinctive, and 2 are very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 6 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 1

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 2

    Very specific

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

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

    Identify the target: Use the argument or infer the directory/system/feature from conversation.

    line 21
  2. Distinctive:

    Name the domain, derive its dangerous paths: Before scanning, state in one line what kind of system the target is, and list the 2–3 failure …

    line 23
  3. Very specific:

    Explore: Use the agent's file-search/read tools (Glob/Grep/Read, rg/find/cat, or equivalent) and git log for churn hotspots to understand …

    line 30

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 6 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

Blindspot Pass

Find the unknowns in a system BEFORE touching it. Reconnaissance only.

<HARD-RULE>Read-only. Do not edit, create, or delete any project file. No fixes, however tempting.</HARD-RULE>

Tip for the user (mention once at the start): running this pass in plan mode or a read-only permission mode makes the rule enforced by the harness, not just promised by the model.

Process

  1. Identify the target. Use the argument or infer the directory/system/feature from conversation. If no target is discernible, ask for one — don't guess.
  2. Name the domain, derive its dangerous paths. Before scanning, state in one line what kind of system the target is, and list the 2–3 failure classes that domain actually bleeds from. The generic list below is a backend-shaped floor, not a ceiling — a native UI app bleeds from accessibility gaps, lifecycle/identity bugs, and state-restoration loss; a data pipeline from loss, duplication, and ordering; a CLI from argument edge cases and exit codes. Findings should come from the derived list first.
  3. Explore. Use the agent's file-search/read tools (Glob/Grep/Read, rg/find/cat, or equivalent) and git log for churn hotspots to understand the target. Look for the domain-derived risks from step 2, plus:
    • Hidden coupling: modules that import each other's internals, shared mutable state, implicit ordering dependencies
    • Unowned edge cases: error paths that swallow exceptions, TODO/FIXME/HACK comments, empty catch blocks
    • Stale assumptions: config or constants that encode outdated facts, comments contradicting code, dead feature flags
    • Missing tests around dangerous paths: money, auth, deletion, migrations, concurrency — anything irreversible with no test coverage
    • Churn hotspots: files with many recent fixes (git log --oneline --no-merges -- <path>, ignoring generated files: lockfiles, *.pbxproj, build outputs — their churn is noise)
  4. Report up to 7 findings, ranked by risk (highest first). If fewer than 5 real risks are found, say so instead of padding.

Output format (per finding)

### N. <one-line risk statement>  [risk: high|medium|low]
Why it matters: <1-2 sentences, concrete failure scenario>
Investigate: `<ready-to-paste follow-up prompt the user can run next>`

End with a one-line recommendation of which finding to chase first.

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.