Loading...
Loading...
Found 7 Skills
Review code through hostile perspectives to find bugs, security issues, and unintended consequences the author missed. Use when reviewing PRs, auditing codebases, or before critical deployments.
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".
Review code changes for bugs, security issues, and code quality using Claude Code CLI as an external adversarial reviewer. Use from any agent or provider when the user asks for a code review, wants to check code for bugs or security issues, asks to review a PR, branch, commit, or diff, or says things like "any issues with this?", "review before I push", "check my changes", "look at what I changed", or "review my PR". Tell Claude where to find the code.
Adversarial code review that assumes bugs exist and hunts for them. Use when asked to review code, find bugs, audit for correctness, stress-test a PR, or when someone says "tear this apart" or "what's wrong with this". Give no benefit of the doubt — every line is guilty until proven innocent.
AFK adversarial code-review loop: Cursor agent CLI critic (grug + thermo-nuclear) produces structured findings; Codex validator confirms or pushbacks on regression risk; parent adjudicates and commits fixes per finding until clean. Config at ~/.config/adversarial-review/config.toml. Use for adversarial review, clean code loop, or unattended branch hardening.
Parallel adversarial review protocol that launches two independent blind judge sub-agents simultaneously to review the same target, synthesizes their findings, applies fixes, and re-judges until both pass or escalates after 2 iterations. Trigger: When user says "judgment day", "judgment-day", "review adversarial", "dual review", "doble review", "juzgar", "que lo juzguen".
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.