steel-quench

Solid

All-angle verification meta-skill for near-complete artifacts. Turns vague design anxiety into structured challenger waves using fh-commons:quench-challenger, then drives defense and convergence until root weaknesses, residual risks, and added complexity are explicit. Covers standard attack/defense rounds, optional Meta-Aware Adversary mode for AI-specific risks such as hallucination, context collapse, prompt injection, and tool lock-in, and Wave-P3 re-attack after an upstream gate declares PASS. Built-in outputs emphasize attack-plus-prescription pairs and can feed fh-meta:persona-innovator after convergence. Triggered by: "quench this", "devil's judgment", "all-angle review", "end-to-end verification", "steel quench", "deep pre-completion inspection", "did it really pass?".

AI & Automation 14 stars 1 forks Updated today MIT

Install

View on GitHub

Quality Score: 83/100

Stars 20%
39
Recency 20%
100
Frontmatter 20%
70
Documentation 15%
100
Issue Health 10%
50
License 10%
100
Description 5%
100

Skill Content

# steel-quench — All-Angle Verification Meta-Skill > Heating steel and plunging it into water brings internal defects to the surface. quench-challenger attacks → defense → repeat = systematic surfacing and elimination of design flaws. A designer's anxiety is most dangerous when vague. steel-quench breaks that anxiety into concrete attack angles, defends against them, and closes with residual risks explicitly stated. > **Scope boundary**: steel-quench stress-tests a **near-complete artifact** (post-build). For pre-build design decisions → `deliberation`. For completed-asset validation → `sim-conductor`. ## Trigger Phrases | Phrase | Situation | |---|---| | "quench this", "run quench" | All-angle verification just before completion | | "devil's judgment" | Focused challenger attack on specific design decision | | "all-angle review", "end-to-end verification" | Full project scope verification | | "shake out design anxiety", "deep pre-completion inspection" | Concretize vague anxiety | | "attack from the root" | Re-verify from reason for existence | | "diagnose with counterexample", "use this bad case as reference" | Phase 0 calibration | | "did it really pass?", "re-attack after the gate", "the gate said PASS" | Wave-P3 gate-passage re-attack | | `/steel-quench` | Explicit call | --- ## Wave Structure | Wave | Role | Termination | |---|---|---| | **Phase 0** (optional) | Counterexample calibration — extract patterns from external bad cases, merge into Wave 1 (→ `SKILL_de...

Details

Author
chrono-meta
Repository
chrono-meta/forge-harness
Created
3 months ago
Last Updated
today
Language
Shell
License
MIT

Similar Skills

Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category

AI & Automation Solid

phantom-quench

Input-tracing grounding audit for artifacts such as test cases, analysis reports, and design docs. Extracts proper nouns, numbers, citations, version claims, and branching conditions, then back-traces each to declared local files by grep or to external sources by fetch-and-support checks. Marks missing anchors as Phantom Claims and cited-but-unsupporting anchors as Unsupported. A claim is grounded only by non-model evidence: a local hit or literal source span, never another model's agreement. Renamed from source-grounding-audit; old-name references still route here. Triggered by: "phantom detection", "phantom claim", "source back-trace", "where did this come from", "verify source", "does the source support this claim", "grounding audit", "source grounding audit", "citation support check".

14 Updated today
chrono-meta
Code & Development Listed

shatterpoint

Adversarially take apart an idea, plan, architecture, pitch, or decision before time or money goes into it: build the strongest version of it, find the load-bearing assumption, stress it until it holds or breaks, run a pre-mortem, deliver a verdict, and name the cheapest disconfirming test. An interrogation (one question per round), not a feedback list. Intensity is selectable: soft|normal|brutal. Use this skill when the user says: 'tear it apart', 'shatter this', 'stress-test this', 'red team this', 'poke holes in this', 'play devil's advocate', 'be brutally honest', 'what's wrong with this', 'pre-mortem', 'challenge my assumptions', 'is this a good idea', 'talk me out of it' — or when a plan, concept, or venture is presented for judgment and the user clearly wants resistance rather than agreement. Do NOT use for code review hunting bugs (that's /code-review) or for over-engineering review.

1 Updated 1 months ago
sernoxxx
AI & Automation Featured

devils-advocate

Challenges AI-generated plans, code, and designs via pre-mortem, inversion, and Socratic questioning to surface blind spots and failure modes. Triggers on: "challenge this", "devils advocate", "stress test this plan", "poke holes in this", "what am I missing".

316 Updated yesterday
Mathews-Tom