ix-impact

name	ix-impact
description	Change risk analysis — blast radius, affected systems, and what to test. Depth scales with risk level; low-risk targets stop early.
argument-hint	<symbol or file>

Check command -v ix first. If unavailable, use Grep to find all usages and estimate impact manually.

Goal

Answer: what breaks if this changes, and is it safe to proceed? Stop as early as the risk level allows.

Phase 1 — Risk score (always)

ix impact $ARGUMENTS --format llm

Immediately classify:

Risk level	Action
low + < 3 dependents	STOP — safe to proceed. Report and suggest verification targets.
medium OR 3–10 dependents	Go to Phase 2
high or critical OR > 10 dependents	Go to Phase 2 + 3

Phase 2 — Callers and dependents (medium/high/critical)

Run in parallel:

ix callers  $ARGUMENTS --limit 20 --format llm
ix depends  $ARGUMENTS --depth 2 --format llm

Extract: direct callers by name and subsystem, transitive count.

Stop here if risk is medium: report callers, suggest verification, done.

Phase 3 — Import chain and subsystem spread (high/critical only)

ix imported-by $ARGUMENTS --format llm

Cross-reference callers + dependents + importers to identify:

• Which subsystems are in the blast radius
• Whether the change crosses an architectural boundary
• Any tests that cover the affected paths

Output

## Impact: [target]

**Risk level:** <critical | high | medium | low>
**Verdict:** <SAFE TO PROCEED | REVIEW CALLERS FIRST | NEEDS CHANGE PLAN>

**Blast radius:**
- Direct dependents: N
- Transitive (depth 2): M
- Subsystems affected: [list — only if phase 3 ran]

**Key callers:** [top 5, with subsystem label]

**At-risk behaviors:** [from the ix impact behavior lines]

**Recommended action:**
- low: proceed, verify [specific callers]
- medium: test [caller list] after change
- high/critical: run `ix-plan $ARGUMENTS` before editing

Never read source code in this skill. Risk analysis is purely graph-based.