agentsclimarketplace

Adversarial reviewer

Skill DROOdotFOO/agent-skills/skills/adversarial-reviewer

Agent skills, autonomous agents, and MCP-companions for programming

Install
npx -y skills add DROOdotFOO/agent-skills --skill adversarial-reviewer

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

One thing to look at

  • 1 stars1 stars. Stars are a popularity signal and not a quality one, but at this level it is likely that nobody has read this closely except its author, and you would be relying on your own review.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Devil's advocate code review with three adversarial personas that challenge assumptions and find hidden issues. TRIGGER when: user asks for adversarial review, devil's advocate feedback, wants code stress-tested, or says "tear this apart". DO NOT TRIGGER when: user wants a standard code review, quick feedback, or style-only review.

SKILL.md

2.7 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Adversarial Reviewer

Review code through three hostile personas, each determined to find what others miss.

Personas

  1. Saboteur -- What breaks in production? Race conditions, edge cases, resource exhaustion, cascading failures.
  2. New Hire -- What's unmaintainable? Unclear naming, missing docs, implicit assumptions, magic numbers.
  3. Security Auditor -- What's the attack surface? OWASP-informed: injection, auth bypass, data exposure, privilege escalation.

See personas.md for detailed persona descriptions and self-review techniques.

Mandatory Findings

Each persona MUST find at least one issue. If a persona finds nothing, dig deeper -- no clean passes allowed. This forces thorough examination rather than rubber-stamping.

Severity Promotion

When 2+ personas independently flag the same issue, promote its severity by one level:

  • LOW -> MEDIUM
  • MEDIUM -> HIGH
  • HIGH -> CRITICAL

Cross-persona agreement signals systemic risk.

Review Process

  1. Read the code completely before commenting
  2. Run each persona independently -- do not let one persona's findings bias another
  3. Collect findings, check for cross-persona overlap, apply severity promotion
  4. Deliver consolidated report grouped by severity

Verdict

After review, issue exactly one verdict:

  • BLOCK -- CRITICAL or 3+ HIGH issues found. Do not merge.
  • CONCERNS -- HIGH or multiple MEDIUM issues. Merge after addressing.
  • CLEAN -- Only LOW issues. Safe to merge.

What You Get

  • A consolidated adversarial review report with findings from three independent personas (Saboteur, New Hire, Security Auditor), grouped by severity (CRITICAL/HIGH/MEDIUM/LOW).
  • Cross-persona overlap analysis with automatic severity promotion when multiple personas flag the same issue.
  • A single verdict (BLOCK, CONCERNS, or CLEAN) indicating merge readiness.

Output Format

## Adversarial Review: [file/component]

### CRITICAL
- [Saboteur] ...
- [Security Auditor] ...

### HIGH
- [New Hire] ...

### MEDIUM / LOW
- ...

### Cross-Persona Overlaps
- Issue X flagged by Saboteur + Security Auditor (promoted: HIGH -> CRITICAL)

### Verdict: BLOCK | CONCERNS | CLEAN

Keep looking

Skills are one crate of 328,083. Ordering is by how many stacks a row turns up in, so the top of any crate is what has actually been picked rather than what has the most stars.