santa-method

Verifies generated output through dual independent review agents with an iterative fix loop.

Updated May 7, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/mirzadham/trainingroombookingsystem2 --skill santa-method-mirzadham
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent▼
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: santa-method
Source: https://github.com/mirzadham/trainingroombookingsystem2/tree/main/.pi/skills/santa-method
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/mirzadham/trainingroombookingsystem2 --skill santa-method-mirzadham

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve? A single agent reviewing its own output shares the same biases and blind spots that produced the errors, so hallucinations, compliance violations, and inconsistencies slip through to production. This Skill enforces adversarial verification by requiring two independent reviewers to both pass the output before it ships. ## Core Features & Use Cases - Dual Independent Review: Two context-isolated review agents evaluate output against an identical structured rubric, and both must pass for the output to ship. - Convergence Fix Loop: Flagged issues are fixed and re-reviewed by fresh agents each round, with a max-iteration cap and human escalation on exhaustion. - Batch Sampling Mode: Verifies a stratified random sample of large batches, classifies failure patterns, and applies targeted fixes across the whole batch. - Use Case: Before publishing AI-generated technical documentation, run both reviewers against a rubric covering factual accuracy, hallucination-free claims, and completeness; fix flagged issues and re-verify until both reviewers pass. ## Quick Start Review this generated output with two independent reviewers against my rubric and iterate fixes until both pass.

Frequently Asked Questions about santa-method

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I verify AI-generated content for hallucinations before publishing?▼

Use dual independent review: spawn two context-isolated agents that evaluate the output against the same rubric covering factual accuracy and hallucination-free claims. Ship only when both reviewers return a PASS verdict, otherwise fix flagged issues and re-review.

What is multi-agent adversarial verification?▼

Multi-agent adversarial verification is a pattern where independent review agents, sharing no context with each other or the generator, evaluate output against an objective rubric. Independence breaks the shared-bias failure mode where one agent misses its own systematic errors.

When should I not use dual-review verification?▼

Skip it for internal drafts, exploratory research, and tasks with deterministic verification such as build, lint, or test pipelines. It is designed for output that ships to users, carries compliance constraints, or has elevated hallucination risk.

How do I verify large batches of generated content without reviewing every item?▼

Use stratified sampling: run full dual review on a random 10-15% sample with a minimum of 5 items, classify failures by type, apply targeted fixes to the whole batch, then re-sample and re-verify until a clean sample passes.

Why do both reviewers need to pass instead of just one?▼

If only one reviewer catches an issue, that issue is real and the other reviewer's blind spot is exactly the failure mode the method eliminates. Requiring agreement from both independent reviewers prevents single-reviewer gaps from letting defects ship.

What happens if the review loop never converges?▼

The loop is capped at a maximum of three iterations. If reviewers still flag issues after the cap, the output escalates to a human reviewer instead of looping indefinitely, which bounds cost and surfaces genuinely ambiguous cases.