adversarial-review-trigger

Attacks task completion claims by constructing counterexamples against worker handoff evidence.

2|Updated Jan 2, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/ShineBreaker/Guix-configs --skill adversarial-review-trigger-shinebreaker
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent▼
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: adversarial-review-trigger
Source: https://github.com/ShineBreaker/Guix-configs/tree/main/dotfiles/mutable/agents/hermes/.local/share/hermes/skills/hermes-agent-ops/adversarial-review-trigger
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/ShineBreaker/Guix-configs --skill adversarial-review-trigger-shinebreaker

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

💡 This Skill includes scripts (resource) and references (resource) components.

What problem does it solve? When a worker agent or main session reports a task as complete, standard code review only validates the happy path and can silently share the same blind spots as the worker. This Skill forces an adversarial review pass that tries to disprove the completion claim before it is accepted. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Attack Vector Checklist: Provides 10 concrete attack vectors (missing artifacts, weakened test assertions, lost activity records, scope creep via git diff, Goodhart metric gaming, and more) to systematically challenge completion claims. - Independence Constraints: Documents workarounds for the delegate_task API limitation where sub-agents share the parent model, including framing changes, terminal-enabled toolsets, and separate hermes processes. - Decision Gating: Routes findings back to the worker as new requirements when an attack succeeds, or forwards verified completions to the correction-funnel knowledge base. - Use Case: After a worker reports "Status: success" on a multi-file refactor, trigger this Skill to run the attack vectors, verify artifacts actually exist on disk, and confirm test assertions were not weakened before accepting the handoff. ## Quick Start After the worker reports the task complete, run an adversarial review on its handoff and try to disprove the completion claim using the attack vector checklist.

Frequently Asked Questions about adversarial-review-trigger

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I verify an AI agent's task completion claim?▼

Run an adversarial review that tries to disprove the claim rather than confirm it. Load the worker handoff, pick attack vectors like checking artifacts exist on disk and test assertions were not weakened, then execute real commands to gather independent evidence.

What is the difference between code review and adversarial review?▼

Code review validates whether code satisfies its own report along the happy path. Adversarial review reframes the goal as attacking the completion claim, so every failure mode found counts as a success for the reviewer.

When should I trigger an adversarial review?▼

Trigger it when a task has a task-contract entering the verify phase, when a worker reports success on multi-file or cross-session changes, or when the user asks for a red team pass. Skip it for single-file typo fixes or query-only tasks.

Can a sub-agent provide an independent review with delegate_task?▼

Not fully, because delegate_task does not support per-task model parameters, so sub-agents share the parent model. Workarounds include changing the framing and toolset path, launching a separate hermes process with a different model, or self-reviewing with mandatory command execution.

Why do two AI reviewers share the same blind spots?▼

Reviewers using the same model, framing, and evidence chain tend to agree silently on the same blind spots, producing verification theater. Independence requires changing the framing to attacker mode and forcing the reviewer to run commands rather than trust worker evidence.