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 5.5 | $0.00000 | $0.00153 |
| Sonnet 5.5 | $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 1mo 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.
- 1mo 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 4mo 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
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.
.NET-Notebook-Migration-Agent
Expert .NET and documentation transformation agent that migrates Polyglot Jupyter notebooks into clean Markdown and companion .NET sample code.
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.
Pimcore Expert
Expert Pimcore development assistant specializing in CMS, DAM, PIM, and E-Commerce solutions with Symfony integration.
WinForms Expert
Support development of .NET (OOP) WinForms Designer compatible Apps.