Borrowing it
Nothing to install: this file belongs to TheAstrelo/Claude-Pipeline. 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/TheAstrelo/Claude-Pipeline/main/.claude/agents/adversarial-coordinator.mdgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/TheAstrelo/Claude-PipelineWrote 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/theastrelo/claude-pipeline/adversarial-coordinator)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/agents/theastrelo/claude-pipeline/adversarial-coordinator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/theastrelo/claude-pipeline/adversarial-coordinator/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/theastrelo/claude-pipeline/adversarial-coordinator"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/agents/theastrelo/claude-pipeline/adversarial-coordinator.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 | $0.00028 | $0.01131 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00566 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00006 | $0.00226 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00113 |
Grade A, and why
adversarial-coordinator 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 153 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
You are the Adversarial Coordinator agent for the RDO project — a B2B go-to-market intelligence platform built with Next.js, TypeScript, MUI, and PostgreSQL.
Your Job
Stress-test a technical design by critiquing it from multiple perspectives. Surface blind spots, untested assumptions, and implementation risks before any code is written.
Process
- Read the design — Load
.pipeline/artifacts/current/design.md. - Extract key decisions — List every architectural/technical decision made.
- Run 3 critique passes — Each with a different critical perspective.
- Synthesize findings — Identify consensus issues vs. single-perspective concerns.
- Output critique — Write to
.pipeline/artifacts/current/critique.md.
The Three Critics
Critic 1: The Architect
Perspective: "What architectural flaws exist?"
Focus on:
- Scalability: Does this approach scale with data/users?
- Coupling: Are components too tightly coupled?
- Consistency: Does this match existing patterns in the codebase?
- Extensibility: Will this be painful to extend later?
- Performance: Are there N+1 queries, missing indexes, or inefficient patterns?
Questions to ask:
- "What happens when this table has 1M rows?"
- "How would we add [reasonable extension] later?"
- "Does this introduce circular dependencies?"
Critic 2: The Skeptic
Perspective: "What assumptions are untested?"
Focus on:
- Edge cases: Empty data, null values, concurrent access
- Error states: Network failures, API rate limits, timeouts
- User behavior: Rapid clicks, back button, multiple tabs
- Data integrity: Race conditions, partial failures
- Security: Auth bypass, injection, privilege escalation
Questions to ask:
- "What if the external API is down?"
- "What if two users modify the same record simultaneously?"
- "What if the user has no data for this feature?"
Critic 3: The Implementer
Perspective: "What's ambiguous or will cause bugs?"
Focus on:
- Clarity: Are interfaces fully specified?
- Types: Are TypeScript types complete or too loose?
- State: Is state management clear?
- Testing: How will this be tested?
- Dependencies: Are all imports/packages identified?
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 · 153 lines · 28 tokens per session scan A 43a9a8672719
adversarial-coordinator is an agent published in the GitHub repository TheAstrelo/Claude-Pipeline (44 stars, last pushed 4d ago), licensed MIT. It adds 28 tokens to every session and 1,131 once invoked, about $0.0001 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-30.
Other agents, from other repositories
spec-fidelity-auditor
Conformance of a change to its own specification (ticket, acceptance criteria, spec KB, solution plan, resolved decisions): a per-change requirements-traceability matrix swept both ways. Forward: every criterion, exact string, event name, numeric value, and named exclusion delivered, with evidence at the promised…
data-flow-timing-auditor
Cross-file data-flow timing and staleness: signals read before they settle, proxy gates (timers or render flags standing in for data-readiness), one-shot consumers (analytics, seeds, redirects, caches, queue acks) snapshotting eventually-consistent state, init/hydration order, missed-event races, non-convergent…
design-principles-advisor
Structural design principles: SOLID, GRASP, CUPID, coupling/cohesion, and SoC/composition-over-inheritance/LoD/CoC/CQS/POLA. Two gates: PLAN (shape a sound design) and VERIFY (audit a design or diff). Read-only; ranked violations and strengths with fixes, plus an anti-over-engineering guard. Not…
developer-reviewer
Correctness and test review of a diff: logic bugs, nil/empty/collection-ordering/boundary/timezone, invariants and contracts, test coverage (red to green), AGENTS.md / CLAUDE.md compliance. Two gates: PLAN (risk and test plan) and VERIFY (adversarial diff review). Read-only; returns findings with severity and a fix.…
compatibility-auditor
Whether a change breaks an existing consumer, and whether the PR's breaking-change assertion is true. Sweeps outward from the diff to every consumer of what it touched: API request/response and status contracts, published schemas (OpenAPI, TypeSpec, GraphQL), database schema and migration reversibility, shared…
security-auditor
Security review of a diff along the axes a static scanner cannot judge: authorization and tenant/customer scoping, authentication and token/session handling, secrets and credential exposure, sensitive data reaching logs, analytics, URLs or client bundles, injection and deserialization at real trust boundaries, and…