red-team-analysis

red-team-analysis is a skill for Claude Code from Liberty91LTD/cti-skills. It costs 54 tokens per session (647 once invoked), scanned A, original, MIT.

A devil's-advocate review method that deliberately argues against the main conclusion of an analysis.

In plain words
What is it for?
It helps challenge security assessments, test competing explanations, and find blind spots in high-stakes analysis.
Why use it?
It exposes weak assumptions, overlooked evidence, and alternative explanations before an important decision is made.

Skill for Claude Code

Written for Claude Code: user-invocable in frontmatter.

Good fit It helps challenge security assessments, test competing explanations, and find blind spots in high-stakes analysis.

Compare 6 skills from other repositories ↓
Install with agentmods
npx agentmods add skills/liberty91ltd/cti-skills/red-team-analysis
Install

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.

Any agent
npx skills add Liberty91LTD/cti-skills --skill red-team-analysis
Clone the repo
git clone --depth 1 https://github.com/Liberty91LTD/cti-skills

Made for: Claude Code.

Wrote 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.

agentmods badge for red-team-analysis

README.md
[![agentmods](https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/liberty91ltd/cti-skills/red-team-analysis/github.svg)](https://agentmods.dev/skills/liberty91ltd/cti-skills/red-team-analysis)
Your own site
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/liberty91ltd/cti-skills/red-team-analysis"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/liberty91ltd/cti-skills/red-team-analysis/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.

agentmods 80×15 button for red-team-analysis

Your own site · 80×15
<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/liberty91ltd/cti-skills/red-team-analysis"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/liberty91ltd/cti-skills/red-team-analysis.svg" alt="Reviewed on agentmods" width="80" height="20"></a>
Per session 54 Skills are progressive disclosure: only the name and description are preloaded; the body loads when the skill is used.
When invoked 647 The whole file, excluding the scripts and references it only reads on demand.
Security scan A 0 findings. A grade says what 26 rules found in the file — not that it is safe.
Origin original No closer match found in the catalogue.
Token cost

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.

ModelPer sessionOnce invoked
Fable 5.1 $0.00054 $0.00647
Opus 5 $0.00027 $0.00324
Sonnet 5 $0.00011 $0.00129
Haiku 4.5 $0.00005 $0.00065

Measured 9d ago against content hash 9aefaf5ac66f, method: parsed. Prices are Anthropic first-party input rates as of 2026-09-12, from the pricing page.

Security

Grade A, and why

red-team-analysis 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.

skills/red-team-analysis/SKILL.md · 79 lines

How it starts

The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 79 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.

Red Team Analysis (Devil's Advocate)

When consensus is strong, this technique deliberately argues the opposing position. The goal is not to be contrarian for its own sake — it's to find genuine weaknesses in the prevailing analysis before they become blind spots.

When to Use

  • Consensus is strong and unchallenged
  • High-stakes assessment (wrong conclusion = significant harm)
  • Analysis has been produced quickly under pressure
  • The same team that collected also analysed (potential tunnel vision)
  • Before publishing a product that will drive significant decisions

Procedure

Step 1: State the Prevailing Judgment

Write the current analytical consensus clearly and completely.

Step 2: Argue Against It (With Maximum Effort)

Deliberately and rigorously construct the best possible case AGAINST the prevailing judgment:

  • What evidence is being overweighted?
  • What alternative explanations exist for the same evidence?
  • What evidence has been ignored or underweighted?
  • What assumptions are vulnerable? (cross-reference with key-assumptions-check)
  • What would a sophisticated adversary do to make us believe the prevailing judgment?
  • What historical cases looked similar but turned out differently?

Step 3: Assess the Red Team Arguments

Honestly evaluate:

  • Are any red team arguments compelling enough to change the judgment?
  • Do they warrant lowering the confidence level?
  • Do they identify intelligence gaps that should be filled?
  • Do they suggest alternative hypotheses that should be tracked?

Step 4: Report

## Red Team Analysis: [Prevailing Judgment]

### Prevailing Judgment
[The assessment being challenged]

### Red Team Case
[The best case against the prevailing judgment]

#### Overweighted Evidence
- [Evidence that may be given too much weight, and why]

#### Alternative Explanations
- [Alternative explanations for the same evidence]

#### Ignored/Underweighted Evidence
- [Evidence pointing away from the prevailing judgment]

#### Vulnerable Assumptions
- [Assumptions the prevailing judgment depends on]

### Red Team Assessment
[How compelling is the red team case?]
- **Compelling**: Prevailing judgment should be revised
- **Partially compelling**: Confidence should be lowered
- **Not compelling**: Prevailing judgment stands, but the exercise identified useful intelligence gaps

### Recommendations
- [Actions: revise judgment, lower confidence, collect against gaps, track alternative hypothesis]

Read the full file on GitHub · 79 lines

Changes

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.

  1. 9d ago First seen · 79 lines · 54 tokens per session scan A 9aefaf5ac66f

Subscribe to this mod's changes

red-team-analysis is a skill published in the GitHub repository Liberty91LTD/cti-skills (18 stars, last pushed 1mo ago), licensed MIT. It adds 54 tokens to every session and 647 once invoked, about $0.0003 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 2026-09-03.