adversarial-review

# Claude Code Adversarial Review Use this skill when the user wants Claude Code to challenge the implementation approach, design choices, assumptions, or tradeoffs in this repository. Do not treat `$cc:adversarial-review` as the default review path. Use it only when the user explicitly wants stronger scrutiny than a normal code review. Good triggers include requests to challenge the design, challenge tradeoffs, pressure-test a risky change, question whether a migration/config/template change really removed the risk, or honor custom focus text that asks for harsher review. If the user wants Claude Code to go beyond review and perform investigation, validation edits, or implementation work, route to `$cc:rescue` instead. If the user asks for a local review plus a separate Claude background review and then wants the main Codex thread to aggregate the findings and apply fixes, keep the delegated Claude portion on `$cc:review` unless the user explicitly asks for the adversarial angle. Unlike `$cc:review`, this skill accepts custom focus text after the flags. The moment the user wants to steer Claude toward a specific angle or risk question, prefer `$cc:adversarial-review`. Resolve `<plugin-root>` as two directories above this `SKILL.md` file. Always run the companion from that active plugin root: `node "<plugin-root>/scripts/claude-companion.mjs" adversarial-review ...` Supported arguments: `--wait`, `--background`, `--base <ref>`, `--scope auto|working-tree|branch`, `--model ...