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 yogsoth-ai/stress-test --skill adversarial-stress-testinggit clone --depth 1 https://github.com/yogsoth-ai/stress-testWrote 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/yogsoth-ai/stress-test/adversarial-stress-testing)<a href="https://agentmods.dev/skills/yogsoth-ai/stress-test/adversarial-stress-testing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/yogsoth-ai/stress-test/adversarial-stress-testing/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/skills/yogsoth-ai/stress-test/adversarial-stress-testing"><img src="https://agentmods.dev/badge/skills/yogsoth-ai/stress-test/adversarial-stress-testing.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 | $0.00069 | $0.01253 |
| Opus 5 | $0.00034 | $0.00626 |
| Sonnet 5 | $0.00014 | $0.00251 |
| Haiku 4.5 | $0.00007 | $0.00125 |
Grade A, and why
adversarial-stress-testing 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 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.
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
91% identical to adversarial-stress-testing — 2 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 — 122 lines — stays where its author put it; the contents beside it link to each section on GitHub.
Adversarial Stress Testing
Core Question: Does this artifact collapse under logical limits and boundary conditions?
Methodology Sources
- Lakatos (1976) — Proofs and Refutations: counterexample-driven refinement
- Dutilh Novaes (2016) — Adversarial argumentation as dialogical practice
- Clarke BVA — Boundary Value Analysis for systematic edge testing
- Flyvbjerg (2006) — Critical case methodology: most-likely/least-likely selection
- Popper (1959) — Falsificationism: seek conditions where claims break
Strategy Routing
| Artifact Type | Primary Strategy | Rationale |
|---|---|---|
| claim, hypothesis | assumption-negation | Direct logical attack |
| gap, research-question | lakatos-heuristics | Counterexample refinement |
| idea, approach | boundary-enumeration | Parameter space testing |
| experiment-design | critical-case-design | Decisive test selection |
| any (synthesis) | validity-envelope-mapping | Comprehensive envelope |
Budget Table
| Resource | S | M | L |
|---|---|---|---|
| Negation derivation chains | 3 | 6 | 10 |
| Counterexamples/boundary cases | 5 | 12 | 25 |
| Parameter dimensions | 3 | 6 | 10 |
| Validity envelope dimensions | 2 | 4 | 6 |
Tactics
- contradiction-derivation — Negate, derive, detect contradiction
- boundary-probing — Map parameter space, test extremes, find breakpoints
- counterexample-heuristics — Generate monsters, bar or incorporate
Context Management
- Persist derivation chains and counterexamples across rounds
- Track which negations produced genuine contradictions vs. benign outcomes
- Accumulate validity envelope boundaries incrementally
Output
Produces AdversarialStressReport containing: identified breakpoints, validity envelope, surviving refined claims, and confidence assessment.
Available Strategies
Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.
| Strategy | When to use |
|---|---|
| assumption-negation | Classic reductio ad absurdum: negate the core claim, derive logical consequences, seek contradiction or absurdity. |
| boundary-enumeration | Systematic Boundary Value Analysis: identify parameter boundaries, test at and beyond limits, detect breakpoints. |
| critical-case-design | Flyvbjerg critical case methodology: select most-likely and least-likely cases to maximize inferential power. |
| lakatos-heuristics | Proofs and Refutations method: generate counterexamples, attempt monster-barring, incorporate surviving counterexamples as lemma refinements. |
| stress-test-validity-envelope-mapping | Map the complete validity envelope of a claim across all relevant dimensions, synthesizing breakpoints into a bounded region. |
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 · 122 lines · 69 tokens per session scan A 03947096304a
adversarial-stress-testing is a skill published in the GitHub repository yogsoth-ai/stress-test (2 stars, last pushed 2mo ago), licensed Apache-2.0. It adds 69 tokens to every session and 1,253 once invoked, about $0.0003 per session on Opus 5. A static security scan graded it A with 0 findings. It is 91% identical to adversarial-stress-testing, differing in 2 lines, and is treated as a copy.
Other skills, from other repositories
sparc-methodology
SPARC (Specification, Pseudocode, Architecture, Refinement, Completion) comprehensive development methodology with multi-agent orchestration.
verify-samples-tool
How to use the verify-samples tool to run, verify, and manage sample definitions in the Agent Framework repository. Use this when adding, updating, or running sample verification.
build-and-test
How to build and test .NET projects in the Agent Framework repository. Use this when verifying or testing changes.
verify-dotnet-samples
How to build, run and verify the .NET sample projects in the Agent Framework repository. Use this when a user wants to verify that the samples still function as expected.
regex-tester
Validate, test, and debug regular expressions by executing them against sample inputs. Use when asked to build, verify, or explain a regex pattern.
oma-debug
Bug diagnosis and fixing specialist - analyzes errors, identifies root causes, provides fixes, and writes regression tests. Use for bug, debug, error, crash, traceback, exception, and regression work.