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 skills add XRenSiu/claude-code-forge --skill adversarial-reviewgit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/XRenSiu/claude-code-forgeWrote 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/xrensiu/claude-code-forge/adversarial-review)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/xrensiu/claude-code-forge/adversarial-review"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/xrensiu/claude-code-forge/adversarial-review.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 | $0.00115 | $0.05342 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00057 | $0.02671 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00023 | $0.01068 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00012 | $0.00534 |
Grade A, and why
adversarial-review scanned grade A with 1 finding 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 8d 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.
Runs shell commandslowCapability
Expected in a hook, worth knowing in a rule or an instructions file.
grep -rn "exec\|spawn\|execSync" --include="*.ts" src/ How it starts
The opening of the file, as written. The whole thing — 608 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Adversarial Review + Red Team
用多个审查员的并行审查 + 红队攻击替代单人审查的有限视角。
实测数据:单人代码审查的缺陷检出率约 25-40%。对抗式审查通过 4 角色并行(规格 + 代码 + 安全 + 红队)+ 交叉验证 + 综合裁决,将缺陷检出率提升到 70%+,尤其是安全漏洞的检出率提升显著。
Announce at start: "I'm using the adversarial-review skill to create an agent team with parallel reviewers and a red team attacker."
前置条件:
- 实现代码已完成(Phase 4 产出)
- PRD 文档可用(用于规格合规审查)
- 需要启用 Agent Teams 实验性功能。 在 settings.json 中添加:
"env": { "CLAUDE_CODE_EXPERIMENTAL_AGENT_TEAMS": "1" }
When to Use
digraph {
rankdir=TB;
start [label="实现完成\n需要审查" shape=oval];
q1 [label="安全敏感?" shape=diamond];
q2 [label="高风险\n功能?" shape=diamond];
q3 [label="需要多维度\n交叉验证?" shape=diamond];
adversarial [label="adversarial-review\n(本 Skill)" shape=box style=filled fillcolor=lightgreen];
simple [label="简单代码审查" shape=box];
start -> q1;
q1 -> adversarial [label="是"];
q1 -> q2 [label="否"];
q2 -> q3 [label="是"];
q2 -> simple [label="否"];
q3 -> adversarial [label="是"];
q3 -> simple [label="否"];
}
The 3-Phase Protocol
┌──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┐
│ ADVERSARIAL REVIEW + RED TEAM │
├──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┤
│ │
│ Phase A: PARALLEL REVIEW 4 个审查员并行审查 │
│ ↓ spec + code + security + red team │
│ 各自独立产出审查报告 │
│ │
│ Phase B: CROSS EXAMINATION 审查员交叉检验 │
│ ↓ 共享发现 → 相互补充 → 挑战分歧 │
│ │
│ Phase C: SYNTHESIS review-synthesizer 综合裁决 │
│ 去重 → 排序 → 交叉验证 → 裁决 │
│ │
│ [FEEDBACK LOOP]: 如果 REQUEST CHANGES │
│ ↓ → Phase 6 (debug/fix) │
│ → Re-review (scope-limited) │
│ │
└──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────┘
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.
- 8d ago First seen · 608 lines · 115 tokens per session scan A e3ac603c8a58
adversarial-review is a skill published in the GitHub repository XRenSiu/claude-code-forge (2 stars, last pushed today), licensed MIT. It adds 115 tokens to every session and 5,342 once invoked, about $0.0006 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 1 finding (runs shell commands). No closer match exists in the catalogue, so it is treated as the original; first seen 2026-08-31.
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.
agent-teams-simplify-and-harden
Implementation + audit loop using parallel agent teams with structured simplify, harden, and document passes. Spawns implementation agents to do the work, then audit agents to find complexity, security gaps, and spec deviations, then loops until code compiles cleanly, all tests pass, and auditors find zero issues or…