skills/ethics-reviewer/SKILL.md
--- name: ethics-reviewer description: Passive ethical review: manipulation, accessibility, privacy, sustainability in user-facing features. user-invocable: false effort: low allowed-tools: - Read --- # Ethics Reviewer Passive ethical review skill. Activates when user-facing features touch the four ethical concerns: manipulation, accessibility, privacy, and sustainability. Checks designs and implementations against principled constraints without requiring explicit invocation. --- ## When T
npx skillsauth add jasonwarrenuk/goblin-mode skills/ethics-reviewerInstall this skill globally with one command. Works with Claude Code, Cursor, and Windsurf.
3 of 9 scanners reported clean
Some scanners were skipped, did not run, or reported a non-clean status. Review each row below.
Passive ethical review skill. Activates when user-facing features touch the four ethical concerns: manipulation, accessibility, privacy, and sustainability. Checks designs and implementations against principled constraints without requiring explicit invocation.
Use this skill when:
This skill is ambient — it should fire as a background check when relevant keywords or patterns appear, not only when explicitly requested.
Software should amplify the user, not exploit them.
Red flags:
Principle: The user's best interest and the business's best interest should align. If they diverge, side with the user.
Check:
If someone can't use it, it doesn't work.
Requirements (not aspirations):
prefers-reduced-motion)Check:
Collect the minimum. Store it carefully. Be transparent about it.
Principles:
Red flags:
Check:
Software that wastes resources wastes everyone's time and energy.
Principles:
Check:
This skill doesn't produce a standalone output. It annotates other work:
When discussing a feature, flag ethical concerns inline:
⚠️ Ethics: This notification flow sends emails on a schedule the user didn't choose.
Consider: opt-in frequency selection, easy one-click unsubscribe.
When reviewing or writing code, flag issues:
⚠️ Ethics (accessibility): This modal traps focus but doesn't return focus
to the trigger element on close.
When assessing completed work:
⚠️ Ethics (privacy): This analytics call sends the user's full name to a
third-party service. Consider sending an anonymised ID instead.
Not all ethical concerns are equal. Use these to calibrate:
Must fix (blocks shipping):
Should fix (fix before v1):
Consider (improve over time):
When the domain model includes personal data entities (User, Profile, Preferences), ethics-reviewer flags data minimisation and privacy concerns.
Accessibility checks integrate directly into styling work — contrast, focus indicators, semantic structure.
Privacy-by-default patterns in API design — no excessive data in responses, secure defaults, proper auth scoping.
Accessibility testing is part of the testing strategy — automated a11y checks, keyboard navigation tests, screen reader verification.
Before shipping any user-facing feature:
Ethics review is effective when:
tools
{{ 𝚫𝚫𝚫 }} Rebuild roadmap-system.zip, the distributable snapshot of the roadmap tooling (scripts, HTML template, conventions reference, and every roadmap-touching skill, including this one).
tools
--- name: "Suggest: Task" description: "{{ 𝚫𝚫𝚫 }} Suggest the next logical task — grounded in the roadmap's pre-vetted ready-set when one exists, codebase analysis otherwise" when_to_use: "When you don't know what to work on next and want a grounded recommendation rather than picking arbitrarily." model: haiku effort: low disable-model-invocation: true allowed-tools: ["Read", "Glob", "Grep", "Bash(python3:*)", "Bash(npm:*)", "Bash(bun:*)", "Bash(pnpm:*)", "Bash(deno:*)"] argument-hint: [named
development
{{ 𝛀𝛀𝛀 }} Convert an old simple-style roadmap (single Markdown, four statuses, <a name> anchors, roadmaps.json pointer registry) into the rich phase-array format (roadmaps.json source of truth + PHASE task list + prose overview).
data-ai
{{ ƔƔƔ }} Create a pull request to main — wordy or shiny (with screenshots), ready-for-review or draft