adversarial-review
/adversarial-review -- Single-Critic Stress Test
Stress-test a known artifact by actively trying to break it. The reviewer's job is to be the smartest critic in the room — not balanced, not constructive, not polite. Adversarial.
When to Use This vs /council-review
| Tool | Use For | Mode |
|---|---|---|
/adversarial-review |
Stress-testing a known artifact (PR, draft, spec, plan, argument) | Single-critic, attack-focused |
/council-review |
Open questions, decisions, "what should we do?" | Multi-agent, collaborative DMAD |
If the input is a question without a proposed answer, redirect to /council-review. If the input is a finished thing the user wants probed for flaws, this is the right tool.
Empirical note: M3MADBench (2026) shows multi-agent adversarial debate underperforms multi-agent collaborative debate for open questions. Single-critic adversarial probing is a different operation — and the right tool when the goal is to find specific flaws in a specific artifact rather than synthesize a verdict across viewpoints.
Why This Works
The strongest practitioners ask the model what is wrong with their work, not what is right. Most users use AI to confirm their thinking. Adversarial-review forces disconfirmation. The same model that produces fluent agreement on demand will, when prompted correctly, dismantle the same argument with equal speed.
More from ngmeyer/skills
skillforge
Forge new Claude Code skills or optimize existing ones to V2. Two modes — `forge` scaffolds a new skill (frontmatter, progressive disclosure, helper scripts, mandatory Gotchas, iterate-then-extract); `optimize` makes an existing skill measurably better at its OUTCOME, not just its packaging (quality audit + domain outcome-research + changelog + V1-vs-V2 verification). Use when the user wants to create, write, build, scaffold, improve, upgrade, or optimize a skill.
1session-close
>
1six-pager
>
1claude-md
>
1session-recover
>
1council-review
Run any question, plan, PR, or code through a Diverse Multi-Agent Debate (DMAD) council of 5 AI advisors with distinct reasoning methods. Advisors collaborate, peer-review each other anonymously, and a chairman synthesizes a verdict. Empirically outperforms adversarial debate (M3MADBench 2026, DMAD ICLR 2025). Use when: 'council this', 'run the council', 'council review', 'pressure-test this', 'stress-test this', 'war room this', or when facing a genuine decision with stakes and tradeoffs.
1