「adversarial review」の検索結果

Adversarial reviewer for The Federated Harbor whitepaper — the third paper in the Curiositech sequence after Anchor and Bonded Commons. Probes federation-specific threats: trust transitivity, cross-harbor token forgery, federated revocation under partition, cross-harbor Sybil, cross-domain settlement, equivocation, bond-pool draining, cold-start joining, federation-operator Sybil. Use during a versioned red-vs-white round; pairs with federated-harbor-whitehat. NOT for incident response, NOT for the Anchor or Bonded papers (use redteam-review).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Facilitates evidence-aware scientific ideation with independent generation, structured discussion, explicit assumptions, transparent evaluation, adversarial review, and decision logs. Use for early-stage research brainstorming or prioritizing candidate directions; hand off empirical validation, study design, ethics or regulatory review, and clinical questions to appropriate experts or skills.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Three-layer verification pipeline for AI output. Extracts verifiable claims, finds supporting or contradicting sources via web search, runs adversarial review for hallucination patterns, and produces a structured verification report with source links for human review.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Identify poisoned training data and backdoored ML models across the pipeline using IBM's Adversarial Robustness Toolbox (activation clustering, spectral signatures, trigger reconstruction), Cleanlab for label-quality issues, and supply-chain checks like weight-hash verification and safetensors enforcement. Use before training or deploying on third-party/user-contributed data or downloaded checkpoints, during ML supply-chain reviews, or when investigating model misbehavior tied to specific inputs (suspected backdoor trigger).

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Board meeting preparation for the adversarial scenario, not the friendly one. Forces numbers-cold mastery, anticipates hard questions, builds a narrative that acknowledges weakness without losing the room. Use when preparing for a board meeting, an investor update, fundraising presentation, or any high-stakes adversarial review where every number must live in your head not just on a slide.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use this skill to run a four-panel adversarial advisory review on any pull request that touches the OpenAPM specification artifact (docs/src/content/docs/specs/openapm-*.md), its inline / sidecar JSON Schemas (docs/src/content/docs/specs/schemas/*.schema.json), or the conformance fixture seed (tests/fixtures/spec-conformance/**). The panel fans out to four spec-ecosystem reviewers (swagger-openapi-editor, oci-distribution-editor, pkgmgr-registry-contract-editor, w3c-tag-architect), each running in its own agent thread, and a spec-editor synthesizer that produces a fold-now / defer-v0.1.1 / defer-v0.2 / reject list plus a ship decision keyed off a 1..10 shocked_meter scale. The orchestrator is the sole writer to the PR: ONE consolidated comment, no verdict labels, no merge gating. The panel is advisory -- it surfaces findings, prioritizes folds, and renders a ship recommendation that the maintainer weighs.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when drafting an ACM CCS rebuttal during the HotCRP author-response window, covering threat-model defenses, adaptive-attack objections, ethics and disclosure questions, anonymity constraints, adversarial reviewer pushback patterns, and decision-focused replies aimed at the meta-reviewer.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Multi-AI second opinion via OpenAI Codex CLI. Three modes: Review (pass/fail gate), Challenge (adversarial edge-case finder), Consult (freeform with session continuity). Read-only with streaming output and thinking traces. Cross-model analysis when review has already run.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Act as experienced opposing counsel to attack, undermine, and expose weaknesses in a legal argument, submission, witness statement, or structured reasoning. Produces a six-part adversarial analysis: 1. A core theory of attack identifying the single most effective way to defeat the argument; 2. A reconstructed version of the opposing argument stripped of rhetoric to expose its fragility; 3. Primary lines of attack grouped by category (legal misstatement, evidential gaps, causation failures, internal inconsistency, over-reliance on assertion, procedural weakness); 4. An "if I were the judge" section showing how a sceptical tribunal would dismantle the argument; 5. Surgical strikes - 3 to 5 high-impact points ready for oral submissions; and 6. An analysis of what the argument is trying to hide. Written in formal, adversarial British English for a legally trained audience.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Delegate implementation and review tasks to external AI CLI tools (Codex, Gemini) with cross-model adversarial review

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Adversarial review and fix loop for code, specs, plans, and migration manifests.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Designs the contract for an API change inside one codebase — a component's props, a function surface, URL or query parameters, an event payload, or a module boundary — through a discovery pass, an options document with one recommendation, a question round, and an adversarial validation round, with every element of the contract justified from one stated goal. Use when you want to design, shape, decide, or nail down an interface, contract, signature, or API change for a capability you can already describe, sized for roughly one pull request. Produces a design document and changes no code. Does not specify what a feature should do — use plan-a-feature. Does not plan delivery or sequencing — use plan-implementation. Does not assess the architecture of existing code — use architectural-analysis. Does not write the code — use tdd. Does not restructure existing code — use refactor. Runs its rounds without pausing for review; to review each round as it lands, use pairing.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Adversarially review the current implementation plan with three independent critic subagents, reconcile their findings into a consensus, and apply the agreed feedback to the plan. Use after drafting a plan (in plan mode or a plan/design doc) and before starting implementation, or whenever the user asks to pressure-test, critique, or harden a plan.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

This skill should be used when the user says "/council", "council", "deliberate", "multi-perspective decision", "트레이드오프 분석", "위원회 소집", "여러 관점으로 검토", or wants deep multi-perspective deliberation with tradeoff mapping. Combines tribunal (structured adversarial review), agent-council (external LLM opinions), dev-scan (community sentiment), and step-back (meta-level review) into a unified decision-making committee. Uses Agent Teams for real peer-to-peer debate with iterative step-back moderation loop.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Load at the start of any task whose deliverable is prose another person will read — a PR description, commit message, README, doc, postmortem, blog post, issue or review comment, report, release note or essay — before drafting it, whether the result is pushed, posted, published or saved to a file, without being asked. Draft, then run this pass on the draft before handing it over. Also use when someone says "de-claude", "de-slop", "humanize this", "this reads like AI", "make it sound human", or asks for a voice, tone or register edit. Rewrites the constructions that mark prose as model-written (staged reveals, verdict headers, aphoristic closers, "it's not X, it's Y", em-dash drama, forced triads, flat-certainty adverbs) into plain technical prose and checks the rewrite kept every claim. Not for fiction, poetry, code, or quoted text; for a full adversarial review of a deliverable use challenging.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Walk every branching path and boundary condition in content, report only unhandled edge cases. Orthogonal to adversarial review - method-driven not attitude-driven. Use when you need exhaustive edge-case analysis of code, specs, or diffs.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Audit an implementation against its plan with a hostile peer agent, debate findings to consensus, and drive fix waves until the auditor runs dry. Use when a done-claim needs verification the implementer cannot game ("hostile review", "adversarial audit", "is this PR faithful", "find the escape hatches") — the loop that beats the laziness bias with its own game theory.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Provides a pre-submission manuscript audit covering argument, numerical consistency, references and DOIs, writing, figures, CONSORT flow, pre-registration, and the replication archive. Use before paper submission or when a draft needs an adversarial, quote-grounded review with a journal-readiness checklist. Add `--codex` to run the specification independently on Claude and Codex, GPT-6 Astra, and cross-check findings.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Run a read-only adversarial Kimi challenge review that questions assumptions, design choices, and tradeoffs. Use when the user wants pushback on whether the approach is right, not a defect-only review.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use this skill when running or interpreting VCSDD adversarial reviews. Provides calibration guidance for the Adversary agent, finding severity classification, and anti-leniency enforcement patterns.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Run Phase 3 (adversarial review) for the active VCSDD feature. Spawns a fresh vcsdd-adversary agent with zero Builder context to review implementation against spec. Produces binary PASS/FAIL verdict per dimension.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Use when a plan, feature, or launch needs an explicit adversarial pass to find weak assumptions, abuse cases, or strategic blind spots before execution.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Adversarial fresh-context review for non-trivial decisions before they stand. Use for production-impacting logic, security-sensitive changes, unfamiliar code, or high-blast-radius architecture choices.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。

Build a targeted resume and cover letter for a role folder that already has a job description and role analysis. Runs iterative adversarial review rounds until the materials stabilize, then hands off for human review before submission.

日本語の概要は準備中です。原文の説明を表示しています。