How do I install the Equals Hashcode Reviewer skill?

Run npx skillmds@latest add 45ck/equals-hashcode-reviewer in your terminal (requires Node.js), paste this page's agent-chat prompt into Claude, Cursor, or any MCP-connected agent, or download the SKILL.md file and copy it into your agent's skills directory.

What does the Equals Hashcode Reviewer skill do?

equals-hashcode-reviewer It is listed under Coding & Dev Tools on SkillMD.

Is Equals Hashcode Reviewer safe to use?

This skill has not completed SkillMD's automated safety review yet. SkillMD never runs a skill's scripts for you; review the SKILL.md before installing.

Which AI agents work with Equals Hashcode Reviewer?

This skill is tagged as working with Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex. SKILL.md is an open format, so most agents that read a skills directory can load it too.

Is Equals Hashcode Reviewer free to use?

Yes. Installing skills from SkillMD is free, and the skill stays under its author's original license.

Who published Equals Hashcode Reviewer?

45ck (@45ck) published this skill. Their other Agent Skills are listed on their SkillMD profile.

Equals Hashcode Reviewer by 45ck — Agent Skill

Name: Equals Hashcode Reviewer
Author: 45ck

File contents

equals-hashcode-reviewer

Purpose

Review equality, identity, hashing, and value-object semantics so objects behave predictably in collections and comparisons.

Trigger this skill when

Objects are compared inconsistently.
Types are used in sets/maps or caching.
Value-object semantics are unclear.

Expected inputs

class definitions
equality semantics
collection usage
mutability characteristics
language/runtime constraints

Deliverables

equality model summary
risk findings
contract issues
collection-behavior warnings
recommended changes

Operating procedure

Identify the object-oriented concern this skill is meant to assess.
Separate facts from inferred design intent.
Review the current structure against OOP fundamentals: responsibility, invariants, ownership, exposure, abstraction, and lifecycle where relevant.
Surface concrete risks, tradeoffs, and improvement options.
Prefer minimal structural change that materially improves clarity or safety.
Hand off to the next most relevant skill if the issue is broader than this skill alone can resolve.

Quality gates

Findings are tied to concrete code structure or stated design intent.
Recommendations explain why, not just what.
Tradeoffs are stated when multiple designs could work.
Output avoids style nitpicks unless they affect abstraction or maintainability.

Handoff targets

immutability-opportunity-finder
class-responsibility-checker
naming-and-abstraction-reviewer

Output style

Be explicit about uncertainty.
Prefer short, evidence-based findings over long vague critique.
Distinguish design defects from mere preference.
End with recommended next actions.

Failure modes to avoid

Do not invent framework constraints without evidence.
Do not recommend sweeping refactors without naming the benefit.
Do not confuse naming/style issues with true design problems unless they affect abstraction.
Do not force inheritance, immutability, or statics as ideology.

Minimum output skeleton

## Summary
## Findings
## Risks
## Recommendations
## Tradeoffs
## Recommended next skill

---name: equals-hashcode-reviewerdescription: equals-hashcode-reviewer---# equals-hashcode-reviewer## PurposeReview equality, identity, hashing, and value-object semantics so objects behave predictably in collections and comparisons.## Trigger this skill when- Objects are compared inconsistently.- Types are used in sets/maps or caching.- Value-object semantics are unclear.## Expected inputs- class definitions- equality semantics- collection usage- mutability characteristics- language/runtime constraints## Deliverables- equality model summary- risk findings- contract issues- collection-behavior warnings- recommended changes## Operating procedure1. Identify the object-oriented concern this skill is meant to assess.2. Separate facts from inferred design intent.3. Review the current structure against OOP fundamentals: responsibility, invariants, ownership, exposure, abstraction, and lifecycle where relevant.4. Surface concrete risks, tradeoffs, and improvement options.5. Prefer minimal structural change that materially improves clarity or safety.6. Hand off to the next most relevant skill if the issue is broader than this skill alone can resolve.## Quality gates- Findings are tied to concrete code structure or stated design intent.- Recommendations explain *why*, not just *what*.- Tradeoffs are stated when multiple designs could work.- Output avoids style nitpicks unless they affect abstraction or maintainability.## Handoff targets- immutability-opportunity-finder- class-responsibility-checker- naming-and-abstraction-reviewer## Output style- Be explicit about uncertainty.- Prefer short, evidence-based findings over long vague critique.- Distinguish design defects from mere preference.- End with recommended next actions.## Failure modes to avoid- Do not invent framework constraints without evidence.- Do not recommend sweeping refactors without naming the benefit.- Do not confuse naming/style issues with true design problems unless they affect abstraction.- Do not force inheritance, immutability, or statics as ideology.## Minimum output skeleton```md## Summary## Findings## Risks## Recommendations## Tradeoffs## Recommended next skill```

Frequently asked questions

Equals Hashcode Reviewer