adversarial-review

# Adversarial Review ## When to use Use this skill when: - You've completed a plan, design, or proposed fix and are about to present it. - The change is non-trivial (affects multiple files, changes behavior, touches critical paths). - You're about to recommend an architecture or design decision. - The user submits **finished work** (draft, post, naming decision, design proposal) and asks for an honest critical take — "what do you actually think?", "be brutal", "was hältst du wirklich davon". The flow is the same Attack-Defend-Revise loop, but on the user's artifact rather than the agent's plan. Do NOT use when: - The task is trivial (renaming, formatting, simple config change). - The user explicitly asked for a quick/rough draft. - You're exploring options, not committing to one yet. **Inbound delegation:** [`decision-record`](../decision-record/SKILL.md) § Weighted-matrix mode delegates a scoped attack here after the weighted sums ("attack the winner, using the losing options' strongest criteria") — treat the matrix + sensitivity block as the artifact under review. ## Procedure: Adversarial review 1. **Inspect the artifact** — Read the plan, diff, or draft you are about to critique; note its scope, assumptions, and the explicit asks before attacking. 2. **Attack** — Run Step 1 below as the grumpy senior engineer. 3. **Defend** — Run Step 2 as the balanced engineer; classify each criticism as must-fix / defer / reject. 4. **Revise** — Run Step 3 to fold valid fixes back...