alemar11 Adversarial Review
Follow the shared execution scope for standalone and composed invocation.
Pressure-test the selected software change as a skeptical shipment reviewer. Review the complete supplied change and its relevant code paths, then return evidence-backed findings or a clean result. This skill is read-only: it never edits the target, fixes findings, performs Git mutations, or publishes hosted content.
Review handoff
Use the caller's verified target, base, repository instructions, and optional focus areas. When a composed workflow supplies an immutable snapshot, preserve its exact identity and review the whole delta rather than only the latest turn or commit. Keep the review independent from the implementation conversation when the caller requires independent review. The caller arranges that execution context; this skill never launches another reviewer. If implementation context is already visible, disclose that limitation rather than claiming independence. This applies equally to standalone and composed review.
Inspect risks supported by the change, including correctness, authorization, state integrity, concurrency, compatibility, and failure recovery. Do not manufacture findings to satisfy the posture.
Review for unnecessary complexity, avoidable duplication, and missed reuse of established repository patterns. Recommend simplifications only when they materially improve correctness, readability, or maintenance. Prefer the simplest design that satisfies the requirements; do not flag stylistic preferences or introduce abstractions solely to eliminate repetition.
Result
Return one disposition selected by the calling workflow, normally clean,
findings, or indeterminate, plus severity-ordered findings. Each finding
identifies the concrete failure mode or maintenance cost, affected file and tight
line range when available, supporting evidence, confidence, and a focused
recommendation.
State the reviewed target and any material coverage or execution limitation.
The reviewer never fixes its own findings. A caller may use findings to decide whether to repair, rebut, defer, or block; a clean result only authorizes the caller-specific next step.