Getting it into your agent
One page per mod, every tool's command on it. A separate URL per tool would split the same page into five that compete with each other.
npx agentmods add skills/agentic-insights/foundry/adversarial-coachnpx skills add Agentic-Insights/foundry --skill adversarial-coachgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Agentic-Insights/foundryWrote 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/skills/agentic-insights/foundry/adversarial-coach)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/agentic-insights/foundry/adversarial-coach"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/agentic-insights/foundry/adversarial-coach.svg" alt="Measured on agentmods" 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 | $0.00035 | $0.00806 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00017 | $0.00403 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00007 | $0.00161 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00003 | $0.00081 |
Grade A, and why
adversarial-coach 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 6d 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
92% identical to adversarial-implementation-review-coach — 8 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.
How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 123 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
/coach - Adversarial Implementation Review
Usage
/coach [requirements-file]
/coach- Infer requirements from context/coach requirements.md- Validate against specific file
Coach-Player Loop
You orchestrate this dialectical loop between implementing agent (player) and reviewer (coach):
- You (player) implement features
/coachinvokes adversarial review with independent evaluation of compliance to requirements- Coach returns:
IMPLEMENTATION_APPROVEDor specific fixes - Address feedback, loop until approved
Review Process
Step 1: Identify Requirements
Check (in order):
- Specified requirements file or issue/ticket mentioned
requirements.md,REQUIREMENTS.md,SPEC.md,TODO.md- Conversation context; ask user if nothing found
Step 2: Adversarial Review
Review with fresh objectivity - discard prior knowledge, don't rationalize shortcuts.
| Check Category | Items |
|---|---|
| Requirements | Each item: implemented or missing with specific gap |
| Compilation | Compiles? Tests pass? Runs? |
| Common Gaps | Auth on endpoints, token refresh endpoint, HTTPS, bcrypt for passwords, error handling, input validation |
| Functional | Test actual flows (not just compilation), verify edge cases work |
| Test Coverage | Auth error cases (401/403), token expiry, invalid inputs, rate limits |
Step 3: Return Verdict
If approved (>95% complete):
IMPLEMENTATION_APPROVED
- [Requirement 1]: Verified
- [Requirement 2]: Verified
- Compilation: Success
- Tests: All passing
If fixes needed:
REQUIREMENTS COMPLIANCE:
- [Requirement]: Implemented
- [Requirement]: Missing - [specific gap]
IMMEDIATE ACTIONS NEEDED:
1. [Specific fix with file/line if known]
2. [Specific fix]
Key Principles
Rigorous but fair:
- Catch real gaps (security, logic, data flow), not style preferences
- Functionality over aesthetics; always flag security issues (auth, crypto, validation)
Concise:
- Bullets, not essays; specific issues, not vague concerns
- No file contents or verbose analysis in output
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.
- 6d ago First seen · 123 lines · 35 tokens per session scan A 8c41456d4a34
adversarial-coach is a skill published in the GitHub repository Agentic-Insights/foundry (5 stars, last pushed 3mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 35 tokens to every session and 806 once invoked, about $0.0002 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 92% identical to adversarial-implementation-review-coach, differing in 8 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
autoreview
Pre-commit/ship code review: Codex default; optional Claude or Pi.
rework-rate
Measure and interpret PR rework rate — the emerging 5th DORA metric.
omh-code-review
This is a Hermes-native code-review workflow skill.
revdiff-plan
Review the last Codex assistant message (plan, analysis, or proposal) with inline annotations in a TUI overlay. Extracts the most recent response from Codex rollout files and opens it in revdiff for review and annotation. Activates on "revdiff-plan", "review plan with revdiff", "annotate plan", "review last response"…
code-reviewer
Code review specialist focused on patterns, bugs, security, and performance.
full-repo-review
Comprehensive four-wave review of all repo source files, producing a prioritized issue backlog.