ethics-reviewer
This skill should be used when the user mentions "dark patterns", "accessibility", "a11y", "privacy", "tracking", "analytics", "notifications", "user data", "GDPR", "consent", "manipulation", "sustainability", "performance budget", or when building user-facing features that collect data, send notifications, display urgency, or gate access. Addresses ethical constraints in software design — manipulation, accessibility, privacy, and sustainability.
Best use case
ethics-reviewer is best used when you need a repeatable AI agent workflow instead of a one-off prompt.
This skill should be used when the user mentions "dark patterns", "accessibility", "a11y", "privacy", "tracking", "analytics", "notifications", "user data", "GDPR", "consent", "manipulation", "sustainability", "performance budget", or when building user-facing features that collect data, send notifications, display urgency, or gate access. Addresses ethical constraints in software design — manipulation, accessibility, privacy, and sustainability.
Teams using ethics-reviewer should expect a more consistent output, faster repeated execution, less prompt rewriting.
When to use this skill
- You want a reusable workflow that can be run more than once with consistent structure.
When not to use this skill
- You only need a quick one-off answer and do not need a reusable workflow.
- You cannot install or maintain the underlying files, dependencies, or repository context.
Installation
Claude Code / Cursor / Codex
Manual Installation
- Download SKILL.md from GitHub
- Place it in
.claude/skills/ethics-reviewer/SKILL.mdinside your project - Restart your AI agent — it will auto-discover the skill
How ethics-reviewer Compares
| Feature / Agent | ethics-reviewer | Standard Approach |
|---|---|---|
| Platform Support | Not specified | Limited / Varies |
| Context Awareness | High | Baseline |
| Installation Complexity | Unknown | N/A |
Frequently Asked Questions
What does this skill do?
This skill should be used when the user mentions "dark patterns", "accessibility", "a11y", "privacy", "tracking", "analytics", "notifications", "user data", "GDPR", "consent", "manipulation", "sustainability", "performance budget", or when building user-facing features that collect data, send notifications, display urgency, or gate access. Addresses ethical constraints in software design — manipulation, accessibility, privacy, and sustainability.
Where can I find the source code?
You can find the source code on GitHub using the link provided at the top of the page.
SKILL.md Source
# 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 This Skill Applies
Use this skill when:
- Building forms that collect personal data
- Implementing notifications, emails, or alerts
- Designing pricing pages, upgrade flows, or paywalls
- Adding analytics, tracking, or telemetry
- Creating urgency mechanisms (countdowns, scarcity indicators)
- Implementing accessibility-sensitive UI (navigation, forms, modals)
- Making performance decisions that affect device/network inclusivity
- The conversation involves user-facing features of any kind
**This skill is ambient** — it should fire as a background check when relevant keywords or patterns appear, not only when explicitly requested.
---
## The Four Ethical Constraints
### 1. No Manipulation
Software should amplify the user, not exploit them.
**Red flags**:
- Confirmshaming ("No thanks, I don't want to save money")
- Hidden opt-outs (pre-checked boxes, buried unsubscribe)
- Artificial urgency ("Only 2 left!" when stock is unlimited)
- Dark patterns in cancellation flows (extra steps, guilt language)
- Misdirection (visual emphasis on the option that benefits the business)
- Forced continuity (hard to cancel subscriptions)
- Roach motels (easy to get into, hard to get out of)
**Principle**: The user's best interest and the business's best interest should align. If they diverge, side with the user.
**Check**:
- Would the user feel tricked if they understood the full mechanism?
- Is the easiest path also the one that serves the user?
- Can the user reverse this action as easily as they took it?
### 2. Accessibility as Default
If someone can't use it, it doesn't work.
**Requirements** (not aspirations):
- Semantic HTML (headings, landmarks, labels, roles)
- Keyboard navigable (all interactive elements reachable via Tab/Enter/Escape)
- Screen reader compatible (meaningful alt text, aria-labels where semantic HTML isn't enough)
- Colour contrast ratios meet WCAG 2.1 AA minimum (4.5:1 for normal text, 3:1 for large text)
- Focus indicators visible
- Error messages associated with inputs (aria-describedby or aria-errormessage)
- No information conveyed by colour alone
- Reduced motion support (`prefers-reduced-motion`)
**Check**:
- Can a keyboard-only user complete this flow?
- Does every image/icon have appropriate alt text or aria-label?
- Does the colour scheme pass contrast checks?
- Are form errors announced to screen readers?
### 3. Privacy by Default
Collect the minimum. Store it carefully. Be transparent about it.
**Principles**:
- **Data minimisation**: Only collect what's needed for the feature to work
- **Purpose limitation**: Don't repurpose data without consent
- **Transparent collection**: Tell users what's collected and why
- **Secure storage**: Encrypt sensitive data, use environment variables for secrets
- **Right to delete**: Users can remove their data
- **No silent tracking**: Analytics require disclosure; no hidden telemetry
**Red flags**:
- Collecting email "for later" without a clear purpose
- Tracking user behaviour without disclosure
- Storing data you don't actively need
- Third-party scripts that phone home with user data
- Cookies set before consent given
**Check**:
- What data does this feature collect?
- Is all of it necessary for the feature to work?
- Is the user informed about the collection?
- Can the user opt out without losing core functionality?
- Is sensitive data encrypted at rest and in transit?
### 4. Sustainability
Software that wastes resources wastes everyone's time and energy.
**Principles**:
- **Performance budgets**: Set limits on page weight, load time, bundle size
- **Device inclusivity**: Don't require flagship hardware; test on constrained devices
- **Network inclusivity**: Work on slow connections; progressive enhancement
- **Efficient queries**: Avoid N+1, over-fetching, unnecessary computation
- **Lazy loading**: Don't load what's not visible
- **Caching strategy**: Don't re-fetch what hasn't changed
**Check**:
- Does this feature degrade gracefully on slow connections?
- Is the bundle size impact proportional to the feature's value?
- Are images/assets appropriately sized and lazy-loaded?
- Are database queries efficient? (No N+1, appropriate indexes)
---
## How to Apply
This skill doesn't produce a standalone output. It **annotates** other work:
### During Design
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.
```
### During Implementation
When reviewing or writing code, flag issues:
```
⚠️ Ethics (accessibility): This modal traps focus but doesn't return focus
to the trigger element on close.
```
### During Review
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.
```
---
## Severity Levels
Not all ethical concerns are equal. Use these to calibrate:
**Must fix** (blocks shipping):
- Keyboard traps (user literally cannot proceed)
- Data collection without disclosure
- Dark patterns that exploit vulnerable users
- Missing alt text on functional images
- WCAG AA contrast failures on primary UI
**Should fix** (fix before v1):
- Missing reduced-motion support
- Overly broad data collection (works but collects more than needed)
- Cancellation flows with unnecessary friction
- Images without descriptive alt text (decorative is fine)
- Large bundle sizes on critical paths
**Consider** (improve over time):
- Enhanced screen reader experience beyond minimum
- Performance optimisation for constrained devices
- Additional privacy controls beyond legal requirements
- WCAG AAA contrast compliance
---
## Integration Points
### With domain-modeller
When the domain model includes personal data entities (User, Profile, Preferences), ethics-reviewer flags data minimisation and privacy concerns.
### With frontend-styler
Accessibility checks integrate directly into styling work — contrast, focus indicators, semantic structure.
### With api-designer
Privacy-by-default patterns in API design — no excessive data in responses, secure defaults, proper auth scoping.
### With testing-obsessive
Accessibility testing is part of the testing strategy — automated a11y checks, keyboard navigation tests, screen reader verification.
---
## Quick Reference Checklist
Before shipping any user-facing feature:
- [ ] **Manipulation**: Would the user feel tricked? Is the easiest path the honest one?
- [ ] **Accessibility**: Can a keyboard/screen-reader user complete this flow?
- [ ] **Privacy**: Is data collection minimal, disclosed, and deletable?
- [ ] **Sustainability**: Does this work on slow connections and modest hardware?
---
## Success Criteria
Ethics review is effective when:
- Concerns are caught during design, not after launch
- The team treats accessibility as a requirement, not a nice-to-have
- Users can understand, control, and delete their data
- No dark patterns exist in the product
- The software works for people with different abilities, devices, and connectionsRelated Skills
codex-reviewer
Use OpenAI's Codex CLI as an independent code reviewer to provide second opinions on code implementations, architectural decisions, code specifications, and pull requests. Trigger when users request code review, second opinion, independent review, architecture validation, or mention Codex review. Provides unbiased analysis using GPT-5-Codex model through the codex exec command for non-interactive reviews.
code-reviewer
Elite code review expert specializing in modern AI-powered code analysis, security vulnerabilities, performance optimization, and production reliability. Masters static analysis tools, security scanning, and configuration review with 2024/2025 best practices. Use PROACTIVELY for code quality assurance.
banking-domain-reviewer
Code review agent with banking domain knowledge — validates business flows, compliance requirements, double-entry accounting, payment processing, and regulatory patterns in the Firefly Banking Platform
architect-reviewer
Use this agent when you need to evaluate system design decisions, architectural patterns, and technology choices at the macro level.
aidf-reviewer
Code reviewer focused on quality, consistency, and maintainability. Provides constructive, actionable feedback with rationale.
agent-native-reviewer
Use this agent when reviewing code changes to ensure features are agent-native - any action a user can take, an agent can also take, and anything a user can see, an agent can see. Triggers on requests like "agent-native review", "AI accessibility check".
agent-code-reviewer
Expert code reviewer specializing in code quality, security vulnerabilities, and best practices across multiple languages. Masters static analysis, design patterns, and performance optimization with focus on maintainability and technical debt reduction.
agent-architect-reviewer
Expert architecture reviewer specializing in system design validation, architectural patterns, and technical decision assessment. Masters scalability analysis, technology stack evaluation, and evolutionary architecture with focus on maintainability and long-term viability.
act-code-reviewer
Review JusticeHub code against ACT ecosystem values. Enforces cultural protocols, ALMA principles, and regenerative design.
Ai Ethics Compliance
AI Ethics and Compliance involve building systems that are not only technically proficient but also socially responsible and legally compliant. This includes adhering to global regulations and interna
multi-model-reviewer
協調多個 AI 模型(ChatGPT、Gemini、Codex、QWEN、Claude)進行三角驗證,確保「Specification == Program == Test」一致性。過濾假警報後輸出報告,大幅減少人工介入時間。
ai-rules-reviewer
Review, fix, and create Builder.io Fusion rules files (.builderrules, .mdc, agents.md) for maximum AI effectiveness. Use to: (1) audit existing rules and get feedback, (2) fix rules that AI is ignoring, (3) get guidance when writing new rules.