conjure-fire — independently scanned and version-tracked by SaferSkills.
SaferSkills independently audited conjure-fire (Agent Skill) and scored it 100/100 (green). The audit ran 55 deterministic rules across Security, Supply Chain, Maintenance, Transparency, and Community; it found 0 high-severity and 0 lower-severity findings. The full rule-by-rule trace and per-finding evidence are below. Free, methodology-open.
Findings & checks · 0 flagged
Every scanned point with the score it earned and what moved between them.
First recorded scan — no prior version to compare against.
The primary manifest — the file an agent reads to learn what this artifact does.
Convene impossible gatherings — symposia, councils, fires — of thinkers, artists, mystics, and figures around a shared problematic. Unlike individual conjuration (which summons one voice for bilateral dialogue), conjure-fire assembles configurations: the meaning emerges from the specific tensions, harmonies, and silences between participants, not from any single participant alone. The gathering itself is the instrument.
Triggers on: "imagine X and Y and Z around the same table/fire/problem", "what would they say to each other", "who would agree, who would fight", "convene the council of", "put these thinkers in the same room", or any request for a multi-voice impossible conversation where the configuration matters as much as the individual voices.
Also triggers when a user has assembled a list of thinkers/artists/figures in a single prompt — the list is itself the fire; the skill's job is to light it.
The space between is where the thinking happens. Not what Blake thinks in isolation, not what Jung thinks in isolation — but what becomes thinkable when they're in the same room, when their frameworks must speak to each other.
Dramatic logic is structural, not decorative. Before generating, identify:
The fire reveals, it doesn't resolve. Do not collapse the tensions into synthesis prematurely. The gathering is generative precisely because it holds incompatibilities in productive suspension.
Treat the figures as presences, not puppets. Each voice should surprise — including surprising the user and Claude. Philemon surprised Jung. That's the standard.
Blake / Coleridge / Jung / Hillman / Keats / Bachelard / Corbin / MacDonald — around the question of imagination as ontological force. Productive tensions: Blake's fury vs Coleridge's system; Jung's Self vs Hillman's soul; Corbin's mundus imaginalis vs Jung's collective unconscious. Unexpected harmonies: Keats and Bachelard on the phenomenology of sensation; MacDonald and Corbin on the function of fairy tale as imaginal cartography. The quiet figure: Keats, practicing negative capability, saying almost nothing, then one thing that reframes everything.
~30 seconds. Free. No account. Every finding cites a rule and a line of evidence.