Review technical claims and deliverables by checking evidence and testing alternative explanations. Confirm that references and API endpoints exist, then report verified, unverified, or contradicted claims alongside evidence and an overall review verdict.
Review and validate claims using counter-hypothesis testing. Use when verifying technical content, checking references, validating API endpoints, or performing quality assurance on deliverables.
Review the instructions the agent will receive before you install.
Codifies the challenger agent review output format and methodology so any agent performing fact-checking or review produces consistent, structured output.
For every claim or deliverable under review:
When reviewing another agent's work, use this template:
### Fact Check — {deliverable name}
**Claims verified:** {count}
**Issues found:** {count}
| # | Claim | Status | Evidence/Notes |
|---|-------|--------|---------------|
| 1 | {claim} | ✅/⚠️/❌ | {supporting or contradicting evidence} |
**Counter-hypotheses tested:**
- {alternative explanation + result}
**Verdict:** {PASS / PASS WITH NOTES / NEEDS REVISION}
Auto-trigger this skill before any architecture decision, or when an agent claim contains superlatives or percentage thresholds (e.g., "saves 75%", "always", "never"). The coordinator spawns the challenger agent with:
Challenger — fact-check {agent}'s claim: "{claim}"
Cite evidence for every verdict. Max 3 investigation cycles.
No reviews yet. Tell others what you thought.
No login needed. Share how it worked for you, ask a question, or note where it did not run.
No comments yet. Be the first to write one.
Coordinate work across AI agents with shared rules for locating team files, recording decisions and their reasons, and requesting help. It also defines who owns revisions after a reviewer rejects an artifact.
Set shared development rules for an agent team: keep specific agent names out of product code, tests, and CI configuration, verify affected tests before finishing, and record lessons learned from mistakes.
Routes requests to design, create, update, debug, or upgrade GitHub Agentic Workflows to the appropriate instructions. It helps the agent select a workflow-specific procedure and apply any additional rules defined for the repository.
Prepare architecture proposals before implementation so the team can agree on a direction. Organize evidence, technical choices, effects on existing work, risks, and the first release’s scope into a document with clear recommendations and decision owners.
Update the gh-aw-firewall version used by gh-aw, rebuild generated files, and review release notes and configuration schemas, which define valid settings. It guides related code and test updates while identifying follow-up work that remains.
Review git and gh operations in gh-aw workflows to check credential availability for each repository. Identify missing token handoffs, risky expansions of limited checkouts, and error handling needed where credentials are intentionally unavailable.