mastermind-change-impact

Stars11

Forks0

UpdatedJuly 18, 2026 at 18:18

Produce an evidence-backed change-impact brief with `mastermind impact` or `mmcg_change_impact`. Use before editing, during implementation planning, or in PR review to trace changed symbols, callers, component/API crossings, collision risk, and likely affected consumers since a git ref.

Installation

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.

Source

xcrft

xcrft/mastermind

View GitHub Repository View Creator Repositories

Download

Related occupationsSOC

Based on SOC occupation classification

Software DevelopersComputer and Mathematical Occupations·SOC 15-1252

File Explorer

2 files

SKILL.md

readonly

name	mastermind-change-impact
description	Produce an evidence-backed change-impact brief with `mastermind impact` or `mmcg_change_impact`. Use before editing, during implementation planning, or in PR review to trace changed symbols, callers, component/API crossings, collision risk, and likely affected consumers since a git ref.
metadata	{"version":"0.1.0","authors":["mastermind"],"tags":["workflow","mmcg","impact"]}

Mastermind Change Impact

Base the brief on the deterministic change-impact response, not a grep-derived caller list.

Workflow

Select an explicit trusted baseline such as the merge base or target branch. Do not silently substitute HEAD~1.
Run mastermind status as a read-only preflight. Ensure the current working tree is indexed when local changes are in scope. If the backend returns index_stale, stop unless the request authorizes mastermind index .; do not downgrade confidence and continue with a partial graph.

Run:

mastermind impact --since REF --format json --depth 3 --top 100

Use mmcg_change_impact through MCP when appropriate.

Verify full baseline/head object IDs and whether worktree/untracked files are included. Check every limit and precision note before ranking risk.
Report changed symbols, direct then transitive consumers, component/API crossings, and public-surface implications. Attach each conclusion to the response's changed-symbol seeds and repository-relative evidence.

Confidence rules

Downgrade confidence when names collide, edge precision is weak, the index is stale, a work limit skipped expansion, or dynamic/reflection boundaries are likely. Removed symbols can still have old-side evidence; do not require them to exist in the live index.

Do not convert syntactic impact into a semantic guarantee. Do not say an unlisted consumer is safe. If the backend is unavailable, report the missing capability rather than inventing an impact graph.

For a blocked result, state the trusted baseline, the stable failure code, the required remediation, and that affected symbols/components/consumers are unknown until a fresh deterministic response exists.

More from this repository

same repository

mastermind-design-intake

xcrft/mastermind

Turn a design handoff into a task contract that can actually be checked — named source, resolved components, token names instead of raw values, and an explicit list of what stays unverifiable. Use when a Figma frame, mockup, or design spec is handed over for implementation.

2026-07-3111

mastermind-product-intake

xcrft/mastermind

Convert a PRD, ticket, or feature request into a task contract that can fail — behaviour split from outcome, product nouns resolved to symbols that exist, unspecified cases surfaced as questions, and success metrics parked where a merge gate cannot wave them through. Use when product writing is handed over for implementation.

2026-07-3111

mastermind-security-research

xcrft/mastermind

Enumerate what a change can reach and what enforces it — privileged operations and their callers, guards and the sites that apply them, and every module that reads a secret — before designing an auth, permission, or secrets change. Feeds the security review; produces a population and a gap list, never a verdict.

2026-07-3011

mastermind-test-audit

xcrft/mastermind

Read-only review of whether the tests in a finished change actually prove its behaviour — changed code no test reaches, a test exercising a different path than the one that changed, an assertion edited to match the new output, and a suite that ran nothing. Use after implementation, and whenever a change claims to be covered.

2026-07-3011

mastermind-runtime-research

xcrft/mastermind

Gather who already depends on a service, handler, or state owner before changing it, and name the runtime gaps the codegraph cannot span. Use before designing a change to an API, queue consumer, background job, migration, or shared state; it feeds the architecture review rather than replacing it.

2026-07-3011

mastermind-frontend-audit

xcrft/mastermind

Read-only review of a finished UI change against the codegraph — a component nothing renders, a props contract changed without its callers, a reinvented component, or a raw value where the design system has a token. Use after implementing React or Vue work; triggers "review this UI change", "check the component", or a finished frontend diff.

2026-07-3011

name	mastermind-change-impact
description	Produce an evidence-backed change-impact brief with `mastermind impact` or `mmcg_change_impact`. Use before editing, during implementation planning, or in PR review to trace changed symbols, callers, component/API crossings, collision risk, and likely affected consumers since a git ref.
metadata	{"version":"0.1.0","authors":["mastermind"],"tags":["workflow","mmcg","impact"]}

Mastermind Change Impact

Base the brief on the deterministic change-impact response, not a grep-derived caller list.

Workflow

Select an explicit trusted baseline such as the merge base or target branch. Do not silently substitute HEAD~1.
Run mastermind status as a read-only preflight. Ensure the current working tree is indexed when local changes are in scope. If the backend returns index_stale, stop unless the request authorizes mastermind index .; do not downgrade confidence and continue with a partial graph.

Run:

mastermind impact --since REF --format json --depth 3 --top 100

Use mmcg_change_impact through MCP when appropriate.

Verify full baseline/head object IDs and whether worktree/untracked files are included. Check every limit and precision note before ranking risk.
Report changed symbols, direct then transitive consumers, component/API crossings, and public-surface implications. Attach each conclusion to the response's changed-symbol seeds and repository-relative evidence.

Confidence rules

Do not convert syntactic impact into a semantic guarantee. Do not say an unlisted consumer is safe. If the backend is unavailable, report the missing capability rather than inventing an impact graph.