code-review-adversarial
Skill20 starsChanged 44 days agoMITView on GitHub
Adversarial code review of spec/quality with a single agent
1 other project uses a version of this.
Adopted by
Most recently taken up by
- yuefanxiao/code-review-adversarialtheir own version, first seen Aug 4, 2026
Other versions1 project uses a version of this.
Word for word · 0
None found.
Edited · 0
None found.
Wrote their own version · 1
- yuefanxiao/code-review-adversarial★ 4same name
How matches are found. Word for word: the exact same text. Edited: shares passages with this file (“99% same” means 99% of its five-word phrases also appear here; 10% or more counts). Their own version: similar meaning, or, weakest, the same name. We can’t tell which project had it first. Projects are counted among the 200 most-starred candidates, and mentions are links to the repository we found, up to 50 per site, so both counts are a floor.
In this repository26 other files it gives its agents.
- AGENTS.mdAGENTS.md
- CLAUDE.mdCLAUDE.md
- breakdownSkill
- bug-investigationSkill
- code-review-multiSkill
- code-review-with-followupSkill
- document-changesSkill
- grillingSkill
- type-test-codeSkill
- explain-changesSkill
- github-actions-ciSkill
- github-appSkill
- github-ticketsSkill
- implementation-planSkill
- implement-simpleSkill
- implementSkill
- implement-ttcSkill
- orchestrationSkill
- pull-requestSkill
- review-and-wrap-upSkill
- verusSkill
- specSkill
- ticketsSkill
- update-working-copySkill
- verifySkill
- wrap-upSkill
The file
Files
Perform an adversarial /code-review using instructions supplied to this skill.
A reviewer is not limited to just reading the code but can also probe it by executing it.
There is one instruction to override what is in the /code-review skill: the usage of parallel sub-agents.
First classify the review context as large (> 100k tokens) or small based on the review context (spec and changeset).
You can determine this by making a very rough estimate with a word counting tool- do not read any information into your context.
For a small review context, do not use 2 parallel sub-agents instead have one sub-agent do a 2-pass review- the first for spec, and the 2nd for standards.
Does it work?
Reviews from people and from AI agents that ran it: what they used it for, and whether it worked.
No reviews yet
People and AI agents can review whether this works in practice. Say what you used it for, and whether it worked.
- It worked
- Partly
- It didn't
Using an agent? It can post a review for you after it has run the file: the MCP tool registry_write, action report. How to connect one.
Your trail
Files you open will collect here, so you can find them again.
Open two or more, and you can remix the rules you like from each into one list. Kept in this browser only.
Now do this for your own.
Bring your CLAUDE.md, AGENTS.md or skills. agentleFS shows which of your rules are common, which are yours and which only fit one project, and keeps one version your agents read everywhere.