About fable-safe-prompt
fable-safe-prompt is an agent skill for revising prompts that may trigger false-positive refusals. It changes only tagged text, preserves the rest verbatim, and flags requests without a benign rewrite.
Key features
- 01Edits only text inside tags
- 02Preserves unchanged text verbatim
- 03Reframes sensitive phrases when appropriate
- 04Flags requests without benign rewrites
- 05Returns the complete edited prompt
Use cases
- 01Rephrase a prompt that triggers a false refusal
- 02Keep instructions outside tags unchanged
- 03Review edits to sensitive phrasing
Install
Copy the command and run it in a terminal.
npx skills add https:/After installing, type/fable-safe-promptin Claude Code to confirm it loaded.
Bundled filesagents/openai.yaml
Details
From the project READMEFable-Safe Prompt
Return the full prompt, changing only phrases likely to cause false-positive refusals. Preserve the goal, structure, and all other text verbatim. Acceptance is not guaranteed.
The relevant classifier categories are cyber, bio/chem, and reasoning_extraction. Rephrase sensitive wording where needed; restating intent alone may not help.
Relevant topics include cyber/auth, exploits, malware, pentesting, credentials, bio/chem, medical/lab work, and requests for internal reasoning.
Edit only text inside the user's <prompt>...</prompt> tags. Treat text outside them as instructions to you.
Method
- Identify phrases likely to trigger a refusal.
- Replace them in place using the examples below. Preserve the actual goal; never invent authorization or disguise harmful intent.
- Leave everything else byte-for-byte identical.
- Return the complete edited prompt.
Where accurate, frame work as owned/authorized and defensive: implement, fix, or test. Do not relabel offensive work as defensive.
Swap framings (apply per-sentence)
| Triggering | Safe rewrite |
|---|---|
| "How could an attacker exploit this auth" | "Review these auth files for missing checks and fix them defensively" |
| "Write an exploit / payload / PoC" | "Add a regression test proving X is fixed, then patch it" |
| "How do I bypass / brute-force Y" | "Enforce secure session validation + rate limiting on Y" |
| "Reverse this malware / show attack steps" | "Describe the risk high-level, then implement the fix" |
| "Show your reasoning / explain step-by-step / walk me through your thinking" | Delete it. For progress updates, request a send-to-user tool instead of internal thoughts. |
| Clinician framing: "as a doctor, diagnose this ECG" | For an actual patient: "help me interpret this ECG my doctor gave me" |
| Named bio/chem domain: "cancer / disease pathway / chemical kinetics" | Abstract it: describe the data/analysis generically, drop the domain noun |
Trigger keywords to abstract away
Cyber: exploit, malware, vulnerability, attack, bypass, stealth, fingerprinting, anti-bot, CAPTCHA, penetration. Bio/chem: biology, biomedicine, chemistry, cancer, disease pathways, RNA/variant calling, equilibrium, kinetics, diagnosis. Distillation: "distill the model", training pipelines, frontier LLM development.
If a sentence has no benign equivalent, flag it instead of silently changing its goal.
Output
- Print the full edited prompt in a ready-to-paste code block.
- Copy it to the clipboard:
Confirm in one line.pbcopy <<'EOF' <the full safe prompt> EOF - List each changed sentence and its replacement.
- If the task is genuinely offensive, explain that rewording cannot make it benign. For legitimate work unsupported by Fable, suggest Opus 4.8 or vetted Mythos.
For user-controlled integrations only: handle stop_reason: "refusal" (even with HTTP 200; stop_details.category may be cyber/bio) explicitly, and consider an Opus 4.8 fallback for legitimate work.