agentleFS
Sign inStart free
kiku-jwkiku-jw/codex-skills/adversarial-review/SKILL.md

adversarial-review

Skill0 starsChanged 4 months agoMITView on GitHub

Run a second-pass review on meaningful changes with a deliberately skeptical lens: bugs, regressions, security, prompt or tool abuse, data loss, and missing tests. Use after non-trivial diffs or risky agent output.

104 other projects use a version of this.

Adopted by

Most recently taken up by

Used with

Projects with it also use rethink, root-cause-analysis and 10 more.

Other files people use alongside this one.

Files found in the same public projects as a version of this one, more often than they turn up anywhere else. Each project counts once, large collections count for less, and this file's own repository is left out.
  • fabioespindulaSkill

    rethink

    Reframe a plan, idea, or decision before the user commits to it. Use when the user asks to rethink, step back, pressure-test, gut-check, decide, right-size, simplify, think bigger about, or evaluate a concrete plan or decision in product, strategy, technical architecture, career, life, company direction, or personal priorities. This skill improves decision quality before action: clarify the real question, challenge assumptions, compare alternatives, calibrate ambition, classify the operating mode, surface risks, and recommend a next move. Do not use for broad future exploration without a concrete decision; that belongs to a think-big or research-style skill.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • MicrosoftSkill

    root-cause-analysis

    Use when a Regional Retail Manager asks I'm seeing unusual inventory movement at our Northwest stores. Can you help me understand what's happening?

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • anasahmed07Skill

    better-auth-best-practices

    Skill for integrating Better Auth - the comprehensive TypeScript authentication framework.

    Also in 4 projects that use this

  • DockerSkill

    fix-issue

    Fix a single GitHub issue end-to-end: triage, research, write the fix, review, and create a PR. Use when asked to fix an issue: "fix issue 1234", "resolve #500", "create a PR for issue 200".

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • MicrosoftSkill

    pull-request

    Write concise, focused pull request descriptions for Wassette — at most three sentences on the what and why, with an explicit note on any breaking public-API change and how users adapt. Use when opening or editing a Wassette pull request.

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • juriwiensSkill

    codex-review

    Run code review via Codex CLI

    Also in 3 projects that use this

  • +2 more from microsoft

The file

We split this skill into the rules it gives an agent

5 rules. 0 are common, 4 are distinctive, and 1 is very specific to this project.

  • 0

    Common

    Most of the 93 edited versions we read keep these.

  • 4

    Distinctive

    This author's own choices. Worth a look.

  • 1

    Very specific

    Tied to their project's names, files or tools. Probably skip.

  • Common
  • Distinctive
  • Very specific
  1. Distinctive:

    Do not use when: the task is a trivial copy edit or there is no changed behavior to review.

    line 10
  2. Distinctive:

    Every non-trivial silent-failure risk calls out the missing test surface.

    line 24
  3. Distinctive:

    If there are no findings, the response still states the residual risk honestly.

    line 25
  4. Very specific:

    If clean: an explicit no findings statement plus residual risk or testing gaps.

    line 29
  5. Distinctive:

    No implementation detours, no rewrite plan, and no style-only padding.

    line 30

“Common” is measured: kept by at least 6 in 10 of the 93 edited versions of this file we could read. “Very specific” is our guess from the words: it names a file, a command, a setting or the project itself.

Keep what fits and drop the rest. Your version, ready for your agents.
Files
SKILL.md

Adversarial Review

Metadata

  • Trigger when: a meaningful diff, refactor, workflow change, or agent-generated patch deserves a skeptical second pass.
  • Do not use when: the task is a trivial copy edit or there is no changed behavior to review.

Skill Purpose

Stress-test a change for correctness, regressions, security, destructive side effects, and missing test coverage before anyone treats it as safe.

Instructions

  1. Inspect the changed behavior first, not just the diff text. If another model or isolated review path is available, use it; otherwise deliberately switch into a failure-hunting stance.
  2. Review for the highest-signal risks: correctness bugs, behavior regressions, permission mistakes, prompt or tool abuse surfaces, data loss, destructive side effects, and missing or weak tests.
  3. Report findings first and tie each one to concrete behavior plus file references. If there are no findings, say that explicitly and mention any residual risk or testing gap that still remains.

Non-Negotiable Acceptance Criteria

  • Findings are ordered by severity and grounded in observable behavior.
  • Style nits do not outrank bugs, regressions, security flaws, or missing tests.
  • Every non-trivial silent-failure risk calls out the missing test surface.
  • If there are no findings, the response still states the residual risk honestly.

Output

  • A findings-first review with concrete file references and why each issue matters.
  • If clean: an explicit no findings statement plus residual risk or testing gaps.
  • No implementation detours, no rewrite plan, and no style-only padding.

Download now (ZIP)

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
What did you use it for? e.g. Reviewing pull requests in a Rails app

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.

Check your setup, free