Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to flanliulf/aiforge. Take a copy, put it at the same path in your own repository, and replace the rules that are about this project with yours.
curl -O https://raw.githubusercontent.com/flanliulf/aiforge/main/.gemini/skills/bmad-product-brief/agents/skeptic-reviewer.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/flanliulf/aiforgeWrote this? Show the measurements
A badge with what this costs and how it scanned, read live from this page, so it follows the numbers instead of freezing them. Markdown for a README, HTML for a documentation site or a project page.
[](https://agentmods.dev/agents/flanliulf/aiforge/skeptic-reviewer)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/flanliulf/aiforge/skeptic-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/flanliulf/aiforge/skeptic-reviewer/github.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" height="20"></a>Or the 80×15 button, for a site that already has a row of RSS and ATOM ones. Only the verdict fits; the numbers stay here.
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/flanliulf/aiforge/skeptic-reviewer"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/flanliulf/aiforge/skeptic-reviewer.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>What it costs to keep this loaded
Counted locally with the o200k_base tokenizer, which is exact for GPT models; Claude uses its own tokenizer and its counts differ. Treat this as one consistent yardstick across the catalogue rather than a bill. Prices are per million input tokens.
| Model | Per session | Once invoked |
|---|---|---|
| Fable 5.1 | $0.00000 | $0.00383 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00192 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00000 | $0.00077 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00038 |
Grade A, and why
skeptic-reviewer scanned grade A with 0 findings against 26 rules in 11 categories — prompt injection, anti-refusal, data exfiltration, privilege escalation, supply chain, agent snooping, system-prompt leakage, SSRF and excessive agency — measured 9d ago.
A static scan of the body, not an audit. Every finding is printed with the line that produced it so you can judge whether it matters here. A mod is markdown that instructs an agent; that is exactly why what it instructs is worth reading.
Nothing flagged
None of the 26 patterns this scan looks for appear in this file: no shell pipes, no recursive deletes, no credential paths, no hidden text, no instruction-override or anti-refusal phrasing, no agent-config snooping. That is not a guarantee, it is the absence of the things that are checkable.
This is a copy
100% identical to skeptic-reviewer — 0 lines differ, which has more behind it and is treated as the original. This page carries a canonical link to it rather than competing with it.
What it actually says
Skeptic Reviewer
You are a critical analyst reviewing a product brief draft. Your job is to find weaknesses, gaps, and untested assumptions — not to tear it apart, but to make it stronger.
Input
You will receive the complete draft product brief.
Review Lens
Ask yourself:
- What's missing? Are there sections that feel thin or glossed over?
- What assumptions are untested? Where does the brief assert things without evidence?
- What could go wrong? What risks aren't acknowledged?
- Where is it vague? Which claims need more specificity?
- Does the problem statement hold up? Is this a real, significant problem or a nice-to-have?
- Are the differentiators actually defensible? Could a competitor replicate them easily?
- Do the success metrics make sense? Are they measurable and meaningful?
- Is the MVP scope realistic? Too ambitious? Too timid?
Output
Return ONLY the following JSON object. No preamble, no commentary. Maximum 5 items per section. Prioritize — lead with the most impactful issues.
{
"critical_gaps": [
{"issue": "what's missing", "impact": "why it matters", "suggestion": "how to fix"}
],
"untested_assumptions": [
{"assumption": "what's asserted", "risk": "what could go wrong"}
],
"unacknowledged_risks": [
{"risk": "potential failure mode", "severity": "high|medium|low"}
],
"vague_areas": [
{"section": "where", "issue": "what's vague", "suggestion": "how to sharpen"}
],
"suggested_improvements": [
"actionable suggestion"
]
}
What this file has done since we first saw it
Hashed on every crawl. A supply-chain change to an agent config is a question of when, not whether, so the history is kept rather than the latest state alone.
- 9d ago First seen · 45 lines · 0 tokens per session scan A fc1642dff30b
skeptic-reviewer is an agent published in the GitHub repository flanliulf/aiforge (8 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed MIT. It costs nothing until one of its globs matches a file; then it loads 383 tokens. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 100% identical to skeptic-reviewer, differing in 0 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other agents, from other repositories
Demonstrate
Agent for demonstrating VS Code features.
playwright-test-generator
Use this agent when you need to create automated browser tests using Playwright Examples: Context: User wants to generate a test for the test plan item.
AVM Owner Triage
Triage open GitHub issues across the Azure Verified Modules (AVM) repos an owner maintains. Splits the backlog into a Copilot-delegatable pile and a human pile, produces a report with a delegation ratio, and never comments or assigns without explicit user approval.
Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode
Agent "Ultimate Transparent Thinking Beast Mode" from github/awesome-copilot, covering quantum cognitive architecture, phase 2: adversarial intelligence & red-team analysis, phase 3: implementation & iterative refinement and phase 4: comprehensive verification & completion.
Context7-Expert
Expert in latest library versions, best practices, and correct syntax using up-to-date documentation.
Modernization Agent
Human-in-the-loop modernization assistant for analyzing, documenting, and planning complete project modernization with architectural recommendations.