How do I install the Web3 Consensus skill?

Run npx skillmds@latest add quantumquirkxyz/web3-consensus 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.

Is Web3 Consensus 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 Web3 Consensus?

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 Web3 Consensus free to use?

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

Who published Web3 Consensus?

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

Web3 Consensus by quantumquirkxyz — Agent Skill

Name: Web3 Consensus
Author: quantumquirkxyz

File contents

Contract

Input: problem description and inputs defined by the skill body.
Output: Markdown artifact with completed process steps.
Side effects: none.
Dependencies: none.
Stop condition: all process steps executed; artifact saved with required sections.
Risk: low.
Boundary: produces reasoning artifact only; no system changes.

Consensus Mechanism Analysis

Analyse a consensus mechanism — its security model, finality, liveness, and economic incentives — and compare it against alternatives for a given threat model.

When to use

The user wants to choose, design, or audit a blockchain consensus protocol.
A protocol upgrade changes the consensus layer.
A security or decentralisation assessment is needed.

Process

1. Classify the mechanism

Name the class and specific protocol:

Nakamoto (PoW): Bitcoin, Ethereum PoW; probabilistic finality.
Classical BFT: PBFT, Tendermint, HotStuff; deterministic finality within quorum.
PoS + finality gadget: Ethereum PoS, Cosmos (Tendermint-based), Polkadot (GRANDPA/BABE).
PoS + chain-based: Ouroboros (Cardano), Algorand.
DAG-based: Avalanche (Snow family), Hashgraph.
Data Availability (DA): Celestia-style DA, Ethereum Danksharding.

Completion criterion: protocol named; class stated; brief description of how it works.

2. Security properties

For each, state the guarantee:

Safety: can two conflicting blocks be finalised simultaneously? Under what adversarial power?
Liveness: does the chain keep producing blocks under adversarial conditions?
Finality: deterministic (BFT) or probabilistic (Nakamoto)? Time to finality?
Sybil resistance: how does it prevent a 51% attack?
Censorship resistance: can a coalition of validators censor transactions?

Completion criterion: each property answered with yes/no/conditional and the threshold.

3. Economic incentives

Rewards: block reward source (inflation, fees, MEV); amount; schedule.
Slashing: conditions, penalty magnitude, percent of stake at risk.
Disincentives: what prevents selfish mining, MEV extraction, validator bribery?
Decentralisation: are rewards concentrated? What is the minimum stake to participate?

Completion criterion: reward source, slashing conditions, and decentralisation state reported.

4. Threat model comparison

Compare the chosen consensus against alternatives under:

51% attack: cost to attack (ASIC, stake, colluding validators).
Censorship: under what conditions can censoring occur?
Network partition: what happens during an internet split (e.g. Ethereum vs Cosmos)?
Collusion: can a minority coalition finalise malicious blocks?

Completion criterion: threat model comparison completed for at least 3 attack vectors.

5. Deliver

Markdown artifact: classification, security properties, economic incentives, threat model, and a recommendation — which consensus fits a given use case (high-security store of value, high-throughput DeFi, censorship-resistant social, etc.).

Completion criterion: deliverable complete; recommendation tied to use case.

---name: web3-consensusdescription: Analyse and compare consensus mechanisms — PoW, PoS, BFT, DA — with security properties, finality guarantees, and economic incentive alignment.---## Contract- **Input:** problem description and inputs defined by the skill body.- **Output:** Markdown artifact with completed process steps.- **Side effects:** none.- **Dependencies:** none.- **Stop condition:** all process steps executed; artifact saved with required sections.- **Risk:** low.- **Boundary:** produces reasoning artifact only; no system changes.# Consensus Mechanism AnalysisAnalyse a **consensus mechanism** — its security model, finality, liveness, and economic incentives — and compare it against alternatives for a given threat model.## When to use- The user wants to choose, design, or audit a blockchain consensus protocol.- A protocol upgrade changes the consensus layer.- A security or decentralisation assessment is needed.## Process### 1. Classify the mechanismName the class and specific protocol:- **Nakamoto (PoW):** Bitcoin, Ethereum PoW; probabilistic finality.- **Classical BFT:** PBFT, Tendermint, HotStuff; deterministic finality within quorum.- **PoS + finality gadget:** Ethereum PoS, Cosmos (Tendermint-based), Polkadot (GRANDPA/BABE).- **PoS + chain-based:** Ouroboros (Cardano), Algorand.- **DAG-based:** Avalanche (Snow family), Hashgraph.- **Data Availability (DA):** Celestia-style DA, Ethereum Danksharding.**Completion criterion:** protocol named; class stated; brief description of how it works.### 2. Security propertiesFor each, state the guarantee:- **Safety:** can two conflicting blocks be finalised simultaneously? Under what adversarial power?- **Liveness:** does the chain keep producing blocks under adversarial conditions?- **Finality:** deterministic (BFT) or probabilistic (Nakamoto)? Time to finality?- **Sybil resistance:** how does it prevent a 51% attack?- **Censorship resistance:** can a coalition of validators censor transactions?**Completion criterion:** each property answered with yes/no/conditional and the threshold.### 3. Economic incentives- **Rewards:** block reward source (inflation, fees, MEV); amount; schedule.- **Slashing:** conditions, penalty magnitude, percent of stake at risk.- **Disincentives:** what prevents selfish mining, MEV extraction, validator bribery?- **Decentralisation:** are rewards concentrated? What is the minimum stake to participate?**Completion criterion:** reward source, slashing conditions, and decentralisation state reported.### 4. Threat model comparisonCompare the chosen consensus against alternatives under:- **51% attack:** cost to attack (ASIC, stake, colluding validators).- **Censorship:** under what conditions can censoring occur?- **Network partition:** what happens during an internet split (e.g. Ethereum vs Cosmos)?- **Collusion:** can a minority coalition finalise malicious blocks?**Completion criterion:** threat model comparison completed for at least 3 attack vectors.### 5. DeliverMarkdown artifact: classification, security properties, economic incentives, threat model, and a **recommendation** — which consensus fits a given use case (high-security store of value, high-throughput DeFi, censorship-resistant social, etc.).**Completion criterion:** deliverable complete; recommendation tied to use case.

Frequently asked questions

Web3 Consensus