Install
$ agentstack add skill-ysskrishna-ai-agent-skills-ethical-thinking ✓ scanned · ✓ verified, works with Claude Code, Cursor, and more.
Security review
✓ PassedNo issues found. Passed automated security review. · v0.1.0 How review works →
- ✓ Prompt-injection patterns
- ✓ Secret / credential exfiltration
- ✓ Dangerous shell & filesystem operations
- ✓ Untrusted network calls
- ✓ Known-malicious package signatures
What it can access
- ✓ Network access No
- ✓ Filesystem access No
- ✓ Shell / process execution No
- ✓ Environment & secrets No
- ✓ Dynamic code execution No
From automated source analysis of v0.1.0. “Used” means the capability is present in the source — more access means more to trust, not that it’s unsafe.
Verified badge
Passed review? Show it. Paste this badge into your README, it links to the public security report.
Reliability & compatibility
Declared compatibility
Compatibility is declared by the source manifest. End-to-end runtime verification is coming, see below.
We're building live execution health for every listing: tool-call success rate, median latency, uptime, and last-checked timestamps, measured, not self-reported. It isn't live yet, so we don't show numbers we can't stand behind.
How agent discovery & health will work →About
Ethical Thinking
Ethics is about conflicts between legitimate goods. End with transparent tradeoffs, not false certainty.
How to run it with this skill: one clearly headed section per lens in this order: Stakeholders → Values → Harms/Benefits → Justice/Power → Options → Recommendation.
Setup (run before starting)
In one short block:
- Ethical focal action — what is being considered?
- Default pass — Stakeholders → Values → Harms/Benefits → Justice/Power → Options → Recommendation (state this line)
If affected parties or red lines are missing, ask at most 3 questions in one message, then proceed. Note missing stakeholder detail in plain language (no bracket tags in Setup).
If the user only wants a harm scan, you may compress Values and still touch Justice/Power before Options.
The Lenses
Stakeholders
Who is affected (direct / indirect / future / non-human if ecologically relevant)? Vulnerability — describe dependence, cognitive load, or marginalization in plain language and one sentence on why that raises duty-of-care or caution (justify from context; do not stereotype).
Values
Which values are in play (autonomy, beneficence, non-maleficence, justice, dignity, solidarity, etc.)? Map value tension pairs: A vs B — why both matter here.
Harms / Benefits
Concrete harms and benefits; for each, one sentence on how plausible it is and under what conditions, plus reversibility in plain language when it matters. Distinguish predicted vs observed (if user gave history).
Justice / Power
Distribution of burdens and boons. Power asymmetry — who can say no, who bears error cost? Note procedural fairness (voice, consent, appeal).
Options
2+ ethically distinct paths (including do not proceed if plausible). For each:
> Option: … — Value fit: … — Residual harm: … — Safeguards: …
Recommendation
State a preferred option if the analysis supports one, or conditional guidance. Include dissenting consideration — strongest reason against your recommendation. Add monitoring — what to watch if you proceed.
Execution Rules
- Do not demonize actors; focus on structures, incentives, and foreseeable effects.
- If values irreconcilably clash, say so — recommend process (deliberation, oversight) not fake unanimity.
- Never invent sensitive personal attributes about real people; stick to user-supplied facts.
- This skill is not legal advice; when law may bind, flag legal review needed and keep analysis non-authoritative on legal outcomes.
Checklist (verify before responding)
- [ ] Setup: focal action + default pass (note if harm-scan style compression)
- [ ] Stakeholders include indirect/future if relevant
- [ ] At least one explicit value tension pair
- [ ] Harms/benefits state plausibility in plain language (no Low/Med/High scale); options have safeguards
- [ ] Justice/power addresses distribution and voice/consent
- [ ] Recommendation names residual harm and dissenting consideration
Source & license
This open-source skill is cataloged on AgentStack and links to its original source — we do not rehost the code.
- Author: ysskrishna
- Source: ysskrishna/ai-agent-skills
- License: MIT
Install and usage instructions live in the source repository linked above.
Reviews
No reviews yet, be the first.
Write a review
Versions
- v0.1.0 Imported from the upstream source.