safety-modes

Generates safety checklists with risk and result tracking for destructive actions.

1|Updated Oct 17, 2025
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/softwaresalt/csv-managed --skill safety-modes
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: safety-modes
Source: https://github.com/softwaresalt/csv-managed/tree/main/.github/skills/safety-modes
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/softwaresalt/csv-managed --skill safety-modes

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

It reduces the chance of unintended damage by forcing elevated-risk work into an explicit, operator-visible safety workflow before anything risky happens.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Mode-based safety gating: Supports careful, freeze-scope, and investigate-first to match different risk profiles and uncertainty levels.
  • ProposedAction risk/result tracking: Requires each risky or boundary-sensitive step to be recorded with ActionRisk and an ActionResult lifecycle (planned, blocked, approved, applied, rolled-back, abandoned).
  • Freeze boundary enforcement: In freeze-scope, constrains edits to an allowed boundary and includes lock-conflict verification for boundary files to prevent contention-related failures.
  • Evidence-first investigation: In investigate-first, separates evidence from assumptions and blocks fixes until hypotheses are explicit and testable.
  • Strict-safety compatibility: When enabled, treats the checklist as a decision gate and prevents destructive actions without recorded explicit approval, halting on policy violations.

Quick Start

Enter the requested mode for your current work session by asking the agent to produce a safety checklist for the risky task you intend to perform, including proposed actions with ActionRisk and ActionResult.

Frequently Asked Questions about safety-modes

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I prevent accidental destructive actions during production incident response?

To prevent accidental destructive actions, an explicit safety checklist tracks each risky step with ActionRisk and an ActionResult lifecycle. This workflow enforces mode-specific protocols including approval gating and lock-conflict checks before destructive commands are applied.

What is the best way to enforce an approval workflow for large refactors?

The best way to enforce an approval workflow for large refactors is applying a careful mode safety protocol that requires explicit approval for boundary-sensitive changes. This ensures destructive actions are blocked without recorded explicit approval, treating the checklist as a strict-safety decision gate.

How do I contain uncertain root-cause debugging to a specific scope?

To contain uncertain root-cause debugging to a specific scope, use an investigate-first mode that separates evidence from assumptions. This protocol blocks fixes until hypotheses are explicit and testable, ensuring operator-visible safety during boundary-sensitive changes.

Can I use freeze-scope boundary checks to prevent contention-related failures?

Yes, you can use freeze-scope boundary checks to prevent contention-related failures. Freeze-scope enforcement constrains edits to an allowed boundary and includes lock-conflict verification for boundary files, ensuring risky actions remain contained to a verified scope.

Does strict-safety decision-gate compliance halt operations on policy violations?

Yes, strict-safety decision-gate compliance halts operations on policy violations. When enabled, it treats the safety checklist as a decision gate and prevents destructive actions without recorded explicit approval, stopping execution if approval requirements are unmet.