Install with Codex or Claude Copy this prompt, paste it into Codex, Claude, or another assistant, and let it review the skill page and install it for you.
A direct command skips the review prompt. Inspect the source before running it.
When this skill is activated, always start your first response with the 🧢 emoji.
Web3 Smart Contracts
Smart contract development on EVM-compatible blockchains requires a unique discipline -
code is immutable once deployed, bugs can drain millions, and every computation costs gas.
This skill covers Solidity best practices, security-first development, DeFi protocol
patterns, gas optimization, and audit-grade code review. It equips an agent to write,
review, and audit smart contracts the way a professional auditor at Trail of Bits or
OpenZeppelin would approach the task.
When to use this skill
Trigger this skill when the user:
Writes or reviews Solidity smart contracts
Asks about smart contract security vulnerabilities (reentrancy, flash loans, front-running)
Wants to implement DeFi patterns (AMM, lending, staking, vaults)
Needs gas optimization for contract deployment or execution
Asks about ERC standards (ERC-20, ERC-721, ERC-1155, ERC-4626)
Wants to set up Foundry or Hardhat testing for contracts
Needs an audit checklist or security review of a contract
Asks about upgradeable contracts, proxy patterns, or storage layout
Do NOT trigger this skill for:
Frontend dApp development with ethers.js/wagmi (use frontend-developer instead)
General cryptography concepts unrelated to smart contracts (use cryptography instead)
Key principles
Security over cleverness - Every line of Solidity is an attack surface. Prefer
well-audited OpenZeppelin implementations over custom code. "Don't be clever" is the
cardinal rule - clever code hides bugs that drain funds.
Checks-Effects-Interactions (CEI) - Always validate inputs first (checks), update
state second (effects), and make external calls last (interactions). This is the
primary defense against reentrancy.
Gas is money - Every opcode has a cost paid by users. Optimize storage reads/writes
(SSTORE is 20,000 gas), pack structs, use calldata over memory for read-only params,
and batch operations where possible.
Immutability demands perfection - Deployed contracts cannot be patched. Use
comprehensive testing (100% branch coverage), formal verification where feasible,
and always get an independent audit before mainnet deployment.
Composability is a feature and a risk - DeFi's power comes from composability, but
every external call is an untrusted entry point. Assume all external contracts are
malicious. Use reentrancy guards and validate return values.
Core concepts
The EVM execution model determines everything in Solidity. Storage slots cost 20,000
gas to write (SSTORE) and 2,100 gas to read (SLOAD). Memory is cheap but ephemeral.
Calldata is cheapest for function inputs. Understanding this cost model is essential for
writing efficient contracts. See references/gas-optimization.md.
Solidity's type system and storage layout directly affect security. Storage variables
are laid out sequentially in 32-byte slots. Structs can be packed to share slots. Mappings
and dynamic arrays use keccak256 hashing for slot computation. Proxy patterns depend on
storage layout compatibility between implementations.
DeFi building blocks are composable primitives: AMMs (constant product formula),
lending protocols (collateralization ratios, liquidation), yield vaults (ERC-4626),
staking (reward distribution), and governance (voting, timelocks). Each has well-known
attack vectors. See references/defi-patterns.md.
The security landscape includes reentrancy, flash loan attacks, oracle manipulation,
front-running (MEV), integer overflow (pre-0.8.0), access control failures, and storage
collisions in proxies. A single missed check can drain an entire protocol.
See references/security-audit.md.
Common tasks
Write a secure ERC-20 token
Always inherit from OpenZeppelin. Never implement token logic from scratch.
contract GasOptimized {
// Pack structs - these fit in one 32-byte slot (uint128 + uint64 + uint32 + bool)
struct Order {
uint128 amount;
uint64 timestamp;
uint32 userId;
bool active;
}
// Use immutable for constructor-set values (avoids SLOAD)
address public immutable factory;
uint256 public immutable fee;
// Cache storage reads in memory
function processOrders(uint256[] calldata orderIds) external {
uint256 length = orderIds.length; // cache array length
for (uint256 i; i < length; ) {
// process order
unchecked { ++i; } // safe: i < length prevents overflow
}
}
// Use custom errors instead of require strings (saves deployment gas)
error InsufficientBalance(uint256 available, uint256 required);
function withdraw(uint256 amount) external {
uint256 bal = balances[msg.sender]; // cache SLOAD
if (bal < amount) revert InsufficientBalance(bal, amount);
balances[msg.sender] = bal - amount;
}
}
See references/gas-optimization.md for the full optimization checklist.
Implement an ERC-4626 tokenized vault
import "@openzeppelin/contracts/token/ERC20/extensions/ERC4626.sol";
contract YieldVault is ERC4626 {
constructor(IERC20 asset_)
ERC4626(asset_)
ERC20("Yield Vault Token", "yvTKN")
{}
function totalAssets() public view override returns (uint256) {
return IERC20(asset()).balanceOf(address(this));
}
}
Set up Foundry testing
// test/Vault.t.sol
pragma solidity ^0.8.20;
import "forge-std/Test.sol";
import "../src/Vault.sol";
contract VaultTest is Test {
Vault vault;
address alice = makeAddr("alice");
function setUp() public {
vault = new Vault();
vm.deal(alice, 10 ether);
}
function test_deposit() public {
vm.prank(alice);
vault.deposit{value: 1 ether}();
assertEq(vault.balances(alice), 1 ether);
}
function test_withdraw_reverts_on_insufficient_balance() public {
vm.prank(alice);
vm.expectRevert("Insufficient balance");
vault.withdraw(1 ether);
}
// Fuzz testing - Foundry generates random inputs
function testFuzz_deposit_withdraw(uint96 amount) public {
vm.assume(amount > 0);
vm.deal(alice, amount);
vm.startPrank(alice);
vault.deposit{value: amount}();
vault.withdraw(amount);
vm.stopPrank();
assertEq(vault.balances(alice), 0);
}
}
Audit a contract for common vulnerabilities
Walk through the contract checking for these in priority order:
Reentrancy - Any external call before state update? Any missing ReentrancyGuard?
Access control - Are admin functions properly gated? Is the owner set correctly?
Integer overflow - Using Solidity < 0.8.0 without SafeMath?
Oracle manipulation - Using spot prices from DEX pools? Use TWAP or Chainlink.
Flash loan attacks - Can state be manipulated within a single transaction?
Front-running - Can transaction ordering affect outcomes? Use commit-reveal.
Unchecked return values - Are low-level call return values checked?
Storage collisions - In proxy patterns, does the implementation share storage layout?
See references/security-audit.md for the full audit checklist.
Anti-patterns / common mistakes
Mistake
Why it's dangerous
What to do instead
Rolling your own token logic
Subtle edge cases in transfer/approve lead to exploits
Use OpenZeppelin's battle-tested implementations
Using tx.origin for auth
Phishing attacks can relay transactions through malicious contracts
Always use msg.sender for authentication
External call before state update
Enables reentrancy - the attacker re-enters before balance is deducted
Follow CEI pattern: checks, effects, then interactions
Spot price from a DEX pool
Flash loans can manipulate pool reserves in a single tx
Use time-weighted average prices (TWAP) or Chainlink oracles
Unbounded loops over arrays
Loops that grow with user count will eventually exceed block gas limit
Use pull-over-push patterns, pagination, or off-chain computation
Using transfer() or send()
Hardcoded 2300 gas stipend breaks when receiver has logic
Use call{value: amount}("") with reentrancy guard
Magic numbers in code
Makes auditing impossible and introduces misconfiguration risk
Use named constants: uint256 constant MAX_FEE = 1000;
Gotchas
CEI pattern is violated by modifier usage - A common mistake is putting a reentrancy guard or balance check in a modifier that runs before state updates, then making an external call in the modifier. Modifiers execute around the function body, which means the external call in the modifier runs before effects in the function body. Keep the CEI pattern entirely within the function, not split across modifiers.
address.transfer() and address.send() are deprecated but still taught - Both have a hardcoded 2300 gas stipend that will fail if the recipient is a contract with non-trivial receive logic. The correct pattern is (bool success, ) = addr.call{value: amount}("") combined with a ReentrancyGuard. New code should never use transfer() or send().
Proxy storage collisions silently corrupt state - In upgradeable proxy patterns (TransparentProxy, UUPS), if the implementation contract declares state variables that overlap with the proxy's admin slot (slot 0), state corruption occurs on every write. Use OpenZeppelin's unstructured storage pattern for admin variables and verify storage layout with forge inspect before upgrading.
Foundry fuzz testing hits the default seed repeatedly without corpus expansion - forge test --fuzz-runs 256 uses pseudo-random inputs that may not cover edge cases near integer boundaries. Always define vm.assume() guards for valid ranges and increase fuzz.runs in foundry.toml for security-critical functions. Use invariant testing for stateful properties.
Block timestamp is miner-manipulable within ~15 seconds - Using block.timestamp for time-sensitive logic (token vesting cliffs, auction deadlines) allows miners to shift outcomes by up to ~15 seconds. This is rarely exploitable in practice but becomes significant in high-value time-lock contracts. Use block.number with expected block time for coarser timing.
References
For detailed content on specific topics, read the relevant file from references/:
references/security-audit.md - Full audit checklist, common vulnerability catalog with real exploit examples
references/gas-optimization.md - Complete gas optimization guide with opcode costs and storage layout
Only load a references file if the current task requires deep detail on that topic.
Companion check
On first activation of this skill in a conversation: check which companion skills are installed by running ls ~/.claude/skills/ ~/.agent/skills/ ~/.agents/skills/ .claude/skills/ .agent/skills/ .agents/skills/ 2>/dev/null. Compare the results against the recommended_skills field in this file's frontmatter. For any that are missing, mention them once and offer to install:
