「adversarial-review」の検索結果

Run an adversarial two-phase code review of a change with TWO independent reviewers — Claude and Codex — who review alone, then cross-examine each other's findings, then Claude synthesizes a single weighted verdict. Use when the user says "/adversarial-review", "adversarial review", "review this with Codex", "get Codex to review", "two-reviewer review", "cross-examine this PR", or wants a second independent model to grade a change before merge.

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 wants to "stress-test a design", "challenge an idea", "red team a proposal", "get critical feedback on a design", "validate a design", "adversarial architecture review", "risk assessment", "設計を検証して", "反論をもらいたい", "設計を批判的にレビュー", "デビルズアドボケート", "ストレステスト", "弱点を指摘して", "穴を見つけて", "この設計で良いか", "リスク評価", "設計のアーキテクチャレビュー", or mentions structured adversarial review of a proposal or design. NOTE: Use this for validating PROPOSALS and DESIGNS through adversarial debate, NOT for generic code review, PR review, or normal review requests (use /codex:review or /codex:adversarial-review for those). Also NOT for investigating unknown bugs (use /agent-dialectics:strong-inference for that).

Code review through the lens of real engineers' documented philosophies (Torvalds, Thompson, Carmack, Kent Beck, Jobs, Cagan). Complements abstract-role adversarial review with named, sourced perspectives. Use when automated review findings feel generic, when a PR has architectural or UX impact, or when the author wants pre-submit hardening beyond standard checks.

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 code review that breaks the self-review monoculture. Use when you want a genuinely critical review of recent changes, before merging a PR, or when you suspect Claude is being too agreeable about code quality. Forces perspective shifts through hostile reviewer personas that catch blind spots the author's mental model shares with the 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。

Fresh adversarial code review with binary PASS/FAIL verdicts, evidence citations, and anchoring bias prevention via fresh reviewer spawning.

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 something just built — presume it is broken and find where. Use after implementing a feature, finishing a build, or before shipping, or whenever ATLAS or Boss wants a hostile second opinion on a diff, a running app, or a whole codebase. Spawns clean-context reviewers with opposing lenses (correctness, security, empty-world) and reproduces every finding by running the target before believing it. Distinct from /code-review, which statically reads a diff and never runs the app.

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 code review using the opposite model. Spawns 1–3 reviewers on the opposing model (Claude spawns Codex, Codex spawns Claude) to challenge work from distinct critical lenses. Triggers: "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 code review using the opposite model's CLI. Spawns 1–3 reviewers on the opposing model (Codex sessions typically spawn Claude; Claude sessions spawn Codex) to challenge work from distinct critical lenses. Triggers: "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。

Prepare independent review of a complete Guardrails change before pushing or updating a PR, using the repository adversarial-review procedure.

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。

Force adversarial code review stance that eliminates confirmation bias — reviewer must find issues or re-analyze

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。

Run a seven-agent adversarial pipeline against a resume and cover letter before submission. Produces channel-conditional verdicts anchored to the realistic applicant pool, separates materials quality from submission expected value, and ends with a contrarian pass that can overturn the verdict.

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-pass structural code review with adversarial analysis, scope-aware dispatch, adversarial persona passes, and forced-finding protocol. Supports input modes: branch diff (default), PR number (#123), commit hash, pending changes (--pending). Use when asked to "review this PR", "code review", "pre-landing review", "check my diff", or "review #123". Proactively suggest when the user is about to merge or land code changes. NOT for behavioral verification against a running build (see mk:evaluate); NOT for post-implementation simplification (see mk:simplify).

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 code review using attacker mindset — trust boundary, attack surface, business logic, and defense evaluation

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 code review that breaks the self-review monoculture. Use when you want a genuinely critical review of recent changes, before merging a PR, or when you suspect Claude is being too agreeable about code quality. Forces perspective shifts through hostile reviewer personas that catch blind spots the author's mental model shares with the 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。

Run a skeptical Claude review over the current diff or branch range.

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 critique — devil's advocate, stress-test, honest teardown ('poke holes', 'be brutal', 'was hältst du davon'); explicit request only. Routine code or design review → code-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 code review that breaks the self-review monoculture.

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。

Structured methodology for adversarial thinking — generating attack scenarios, abuse cases, race conditions, and security edge cases against specs and implementations. Produces spec-level gap items, not code-level fixes.

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。

Fresh adversarial code review with binary PASS/FAIL verdicts, evidence citations, and anchoring bias prevention via fresh reviewer spawning.

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。

敵対的分析手法を統合したレビューの entry skill。認知バイアス対策の3手法 （Pre-mortem / War Game / Logic Torturing）と、宣言・主張と実態の乖離を突く claim-vs-actual 検出3パターン（Self-Contradiction / Refactor-Claim Audit / Cross-File Leakage）へルーティングし、通常のレビューでは見えない設計の盲点・ 防御の穴・論理の弱点・宣言と実装のズレを可視化する。