Individual skill

adversarial-review

Adversarially review a code change — assume it's broken, try to break it, and only report findings that survive an independent refutation pass. Use when the user wants a deep, skeptical review of a diff, PR, or branch ("adversarial review", "try to break this", "find what's wrong before I ship", "review this like a skeptic", "what will break in production"). Scales from a single inline pass to a multi-agent fan-out (one skeptic per domain → adversarial verify → synthesis). Distinct from a normal code review: it leads with concrete failure scenarios over style, distrusts the tests, and is honest about what it could not verify.

adversarial-review/SKILL.md

Read pinned source

Source commit 645553ca7622570479e330cc089c65fcf34e0ba8

What was checked

Matches the observed repository HEAD: Yes
Scanner rules are current: No
Repository scan complete: No
Skill scan complete: Yes
Observed behavior: Not checked yet
Last checked: Nov 6, 2026

These are observations at the recorded commit, not a guarantee of safety. Review the source before running it.

Install this skill

Choose an agent in your Stack or copy a command below. Commands fetch the pinned commit and copy only this skill directory. Existing destinations are refused. Copying a command does not install anything.

An install command is unavailable: current rules, complete repository and skill scans, an eligible behavior level and a permitted license are required.

Repository context

Repository stars (not skill ratings): 456
Repository last updated: Nov 4, 2026
License: Apache-2.0

Observed agent integration: No specific integration evidence. Standard SKILL.md installation does not imply verified compatibility.

engineering Derived category

Files and excerpt

File metadata and permitted, redacted excerpts come from the recorded scan. Source links are pinned to that commit.

Browse files

SKILL.mdcore · 9,084 bytes
workflow.jsruns · 9,834 bytes

Read excerpt


# Adversarial Review

A normal review confirms a change looks right. An **adversarial** review assumes it is
broken and tries to prove it — then refuses to trust its own findings until each one
survives an independent attempt to refute it. The output is not "looks good" or a list
of nitpicks; it is a ranked set of *concrete failure scenarios that withstood scrutiny*,
plus an honest account of what could not be checked.

Use this when the cost of a missed bug is high: before shipping, on a large or
half-finished diff, on a new code path with no test history, or any time the user says
"try to break this."

## The stance (this is the whole skill)