Grad AI Ethics Agent Skill
Apply AI ethics frameworks (fairness, accountability, transparency, privacy) to evaluate AI systems for algorithmic bias, explainability gaps, and value alignment failures. Use this skill when the user needs to audit an AI system for ethical risks, design fairness constraints, assess explainability requirements, or when they ask 'is this AI system fair', 'how do we detect algorithmic bias', 'what are the ethical implications of this AI deployment', or 'how do we make this model explainable to stakeholders'.
Install
one command, takes just this skill from the repositorynpx skills add https://github.com/asgard-ai-platform/skills --skill grad-ai-ethicsWhat comes with it
7 434 bytes besides the instructionThe instruction itself
13 sections, as written by the authorAI Ethics
Overview
AI ethics examines the moral dimensions of artificial intelligence systems, centered on four pillars: fairness, accountability, transparency, and privacy (FATE). As AI systems increasingly make consequential decisions, they inherit and amplify the biases embedded in training data and design choices. Ethical AI requires proactive identification of bias, explainability mechanisms, clear accountability structures, and privacy protections.
When to Use
- Auditing an AI system for fairness before or after deployment
- Designing bias mitigation strategies for machine learning pipelines
- Evaluating explainability requirements for different stakeholder audiences
- Assessing regulatory compliance (EU AI Act, GDPR, sector-specific requirements)
When NOT to Use
- When the question is purely about model performance without ethical dimensions
- When analyzing non-AI automation or rule-based systems with full transparency
- When the focus is on AI technical architecture without deployment context
Assumptions
IRON LAW: AI systems encode the VALUES of their designers and training
data — there is no value-neutral AI, and "optimizing for accuracy"
without fairness constraints reproduces existing inequalities.
Key assumptions:
- All datasets reflect historical decisions and biases — "ground truth" is socially constructed
- Fairness has multiple, mathematically incompatible definitions — choosing one is a value judgment
- Transparency and explainability are not the same — a system can be transparent (open code) but not explainable (no one understands why it decided X)
- Accountability requires clear chains of responsibility from developer to deployer to affected party
Methodology
Step 1: Map the AI System and Stakeholders
Identify the AI system's function, decision domain, affected populations, and the power asymmetry between system operators and subjects.
Step 2: Assess Fairness
Evaluate using multiple fairness definitions:
| Fairness Metric | Definition | Tension |
|----------------|------------|---------|
| Demographic parity | Equal positive outcome rates across groups | May conflict with accuracy |
| Equalized odds | Equal true positive and false positive rates across groups | May conflict with calibration |
| Individual fairness | Similar individuals receive similar outcomes | Requires defining "similarity" |
| Calibration | Predicted probabilities match actual outcomes per group | May conflict with equalized odds |
Step 3: Evaluate Transparency and Explainability
Assess whether explanations are appropriate for each stakeholder: affected individuals (recourse-oriented), regulators (compliance-oriented), developers (debugging-oriented), and the public (trust-oriented).
Step 4: Design Accountability and Mitigation
Define responsibility chains, bias mitigation interventions (pre-processing, in-processing, post-processing), ongoing monitoring, and redress mechanisms.
Output Format
## AI Ethics Assessment: [System/Context]
### System Profile
- Function: [what the AI system does]
- Decision domain: [what decisions it makes or supports]
- Affected populations: [who is impacted]
- Power asymmetry: [who controls vs who is subject to the system]
### Fairness Assessment
| Dimension | Status | Evidence | Risk Level |
|-----------|--------|----------|------------|
| Demographic parity | [met/unmet/unknown] | [data] | [high/medium/low] |
| Equalized odds | [met/unmet/unknown] | [data] | [high/medium/low] |
| Individual fairness | [met/unmet/unknown] | [data] | [high/medium/low] |
### Transparency and Explainability
| Stakeholder | Explanation Needed | Currently Provided | Gap |
|-------------|-------------------|-------------------|-----|
| [affected individuals] | [what they need] | [what exists] | [gap] |
| [regulators] | [what they need] | [what exists] | [gap] |
### Accountability Structure
- Developer responsibility: [scope]
- Deployer responsibility: [scope]
- Redress mechanism: [how affected parties can contest decisions]
### Mitigation Recommendations
1. [Pre-processing intervention]
2. [In-processing intervention]
3. [Post-processing intervention]
4. [Monitoring and ongoing audit plan]
Gotchas
- Fairness metrics are mathematically incompatible (Chouldechova, 2017) — you MUST choose which to prioritize, and this is a political decision
- "Removing protected attributes" does not remove bias — correlated proxies perpetuate discrimination
- Explainability methods (LIME, SHAP) explain model behavior, not model reasoning — they are post-hoc rationalizations
- Privacy and fairness can conflict — fairness audits require demographic data that privacy protections restrict
- AI ethics is not a checklist — it requires ongoing engagement, not one-time certification
- Beware "ethics washing" — superficial ethics processes that provide cover without substantive change
References
- Barocas, S., Hardt, M., & Narayanan, A. (2023). *Fairness and Machine Learning: Limitations and Opportunities*. MIT Press.
- Jobin, A., Ienca, M., & Vayena, E. (2019). The global landscape of AI ethics guidelines. *Nature Machine Intelligence*, 1(9), 389-399.
- Selbst, A. D., Boyd, D., Friedler, S. A., Venkatasubramanian, S., & Vertesi, J. (2019). Fairness and abstraction in sociotechnical systems. *Proceedings of FAT* 2019*, 59-68.
Other skills for the same job
different authors, same section of the catalogue
Assess Kubernetes workloads and cluster configuration for AKS Automatic compatibility. Identifies incompatibilities, generates fixes, and guides migration from AKS Standard to AKS Automatic. WHEN: migrate to AKS Automatic, check AKS Automatic readiness, validate manifests for Automatic, assess cluster for Automatic compatibility, fix deployment for Automatic compatibility, identify AKS Automatic migration blockers, is my cluster ready for AKS Automatic.
Discovers available Azure OpenAI model capacity across regions and projects. Analyzes quota limits, compares availability, and recommends optimal deployment locations based on capacity requirements. USE FOR: find capacity, check quota, where can I deploy, capacity discovery, best region for capacity, multi-project capacity search, quota analysis, model availability, region comparison, check TPM availability. DO NOT USE FOR: actual deployment (hand off to preset or customize after discovery), quota increase requests (direct user to Azure Portal), listing existing deployments.
Interactive guided deployment flow for Azure OpenAI models with full customization control. Step-by-step selection of model version, SKU (GlobalStandard/Standard/ProvisionedManaged), capacity, RAI policy (content filter), and advanced options (dynamic quota, priority processing, spillover). USE FOR: custom deployment, customize model deployment, choose version, select SKU, set capacity, configure content filter, RAI policy, deployment options, detailed deployment, advanced deployment, PTU deployment, provisioned throughput. DO NOT USE FOR: quick deployment to optimal region (use preset).
Unified Azure OpenAI model deployment skill with intelligent intent-based routing. Handles quick preset deployments, fully customized deployments (version/SKU/capacity/RAI policy), and capacity discovery across regions and projects. USE FOR: deploy model, deploy gpt, create deployment, model deployment, deploy openai model, set up model, provision model, find capacity, check model availability, where can I deploy, best region for model, capacity analysis. DO NOT USE FOR: listing existing deployments (use foundry_models_deployments_list MCP tool), deleting deployments, agent creation (use agent/create), project creation (use project/create).
Intelligently deploys Azure OpenAI models to optimal regions by analyzing capacity across all available regions. Automatically checks current region first and shows alternatives if needed. USE FOR: quick deployment, optimal region, best region, automatic region selection, fast setup, multi-region capacity check, high availability deployment, deploy to best location. DO NOT USE FOR: custom SKU selection (use customize), specific version selection (use customize), custom capacity configuration (use customize), PTU deployments (use customize).
This skill should be used when working with LaminDB, an open-source data framework for biology that makes data queryable, traceable, reproducible, and FAIR. Use when managing biological datasets (scRNA-seq, spatial, flow cytometry, etc.), tracking computational workflows, curating and validating data with biological ontologies, building data lakehouses, or ensuring data lineage and reproducibility in biological research. Covers data management, annotation, ontologies (genes, cell types, diseases, tissues), schema validation, integrations with workflow managers (Nextflow, Snakemake) and MLOps platforms (W&B, MLflow), and deployment strategies.
Latch platform for bioinformatics workflows. Build pipelines with Latch SDK, @workflow/@task decorators, deploy serverless workflows, LatchFile/LatchDir, Nextflow/Snakemake integration.
Run Python code in the cloud with serverless containers, GPUs, and autoscaling. Use when deploying ML models, running batch processing jobs, scheduling compute-intensive tasks, or serving APIs that require GPU acceleration or dynamic scaling.
How to use it
Take asgard-ai-platform/grad-ai-ethics from the repository into ~/.claude/skills for personal
use, or into .claude/skills inside a project.
The agent identifies a skill by the name field in its header. Two skills with the
same name cannot sit side by side — one of them will be ignored.