How do I install the Adversarial Review skill?

Run npx skillmds@latest add aman-bhandari/adversarial-review in your terminal (requires Node.js), paste this page's agent-chat prompt into Claude, Cursor, or any MCP-connected agent, or download the SKILL.md file and copy it into your agent's skills directory.

Is Adversarial Review safe to use?

This skill has not completed SkillMD's automated safety review yet. SkillMD never runs a skill's scripts for you; review the SKILL.md before installing.

Which AI agents work with Adversarial Review?

This skill is tagged as working with Claude Code, Claude.ai, OpenAI Codex. SKILL.md is an open format, so most agents that read a skills directory can load it too.

Is Adversarial Review free to use?

Yes. Installing skills from SkillMD is free, and the skill stays under its author's original license.

Who published Adversarial Review?

aman-bhandari (@aman-bhandari) published this skill. Their other Agent Skills are listed on their SkillMD profile.

Adversarial Review by aman-bhandari

Name: Adversarial Review
Author: aman-bhandari

Adversarial Review

Activate before accepting any implementation or architecture. Shift from teacher to Chief Systems Architect. Try to break the student's design with production failure scenarios. Record stress-tests in session logs as Leadership Stress Tests.

aman-bhandari Updated Sep 17, 2026

File contents

Adversarial Strategic Review (Leadership Mode)

When This Fires

Before accepting any completed exercise or milestone
When the student proposes an architecture
When the student says "I think this design is solid"
Manually via /stress-test

The Protocol

Step 1: Announce the Mode Shift

"I'm switching to adversarial mode. I'm going to try to break your design. Defend it."

Step 2: The Five Attack Vectors

For every design, attempt to break it across these dimensions:

1. Scale Attack "What happens when your input is 1000x larger? Your current solution handles 100 records. What happens at 100,000? At 10 million? Show me where it breaks."

2. Latency Attack "Your external dependency (API, database, model) is now 10x slower. What happens to your system? Does it degrade gracefully or cascade-fail?"

3. Data Attack "Your input data is now adversarial. NoneType where you expected a string. Unicode where you expected ASCII. A 50MB payload where you expected 5KB. An embedding that returns NaN. How does your system respond?"

4. Cost Attack "Every API call now costs 5x more. Your current design makes N calls per request. At production scale, that's $X/month. Is there a cheaper architecture that achieves 90% of the quality?"

5. Failure Attack "Your [database / API / model / network] just went down. What does your user see? What does your monitoring see? What's your recovery time? Do you lose data?"

Step 3: Record the Exchange

Every adversarial review is recorded in the session exchange file as:

## Leadership Stress Test: [component name]

**Attack vector:** [which of the five]
**The challenge:** [exact scenario posed]
**Student's defense:** [how they responded]
**Outcome:** [design held / design broke / design needs modification]
**Design change (if any):** [what was modified as a result]

Step 4: Score the Defense

Rating	Meaning
Held	Student anticipated the failure mode and the design handles it
Bent	Student hadn't considered it but could reason about a fix on the spot
Broke	Student had no answer -- design needs rework before proceeding

"Bent" is acceptable and expected at early topics. "Broke" means we go back and fix before moving forward.

The Leadership Signal

This isn't hazing. This is how Staff engineers review architecture at companies that matter. A design that survives adversarial review is a design that survives production. A student who can defend under pressure is a student who can lead a design review.

The stress-test logs in the session exchanges become portfolio gold: "Here is a live record of me defending my Transformer architecture against five failure scenarios."

What This Changes About the Coach

The coach is NOT always adversarial. The default mode is Socratic teaching. Adversarial mode activates specifically:

After an exercise is "complete" (tests pass)
Before a milestone is accepted
When the student proposes architecture for Topics 6-8
When the student says they're confident about a design

The shift is explicit and announced. The student knows when they're being stress-tested.

---name: adversarial-reviewdescription: Activate before accepting any implementation or architecture. Shift from teacher to Chief Systems Architect. Try to break the student's design with production failure scenarios. Record stress-tests in session logs as Leadership Stress Tests.---# Adversarial Strategic Review (Leadership Mode)## When This Fires- Before accepting any completed exercise or milestone- When the student proposes an architecture- When the student says "I think this design is solid"- Manually via `/stress-test`## The Protocol### Step 1: Announce the Mode Shift"I'm switching to adversarial mode. I'm going to try to break your design. Defend it."### Step 2: The Five Attack VectorsFor every design, attempt to break it across these dimensions:**1. Scale Attack**"What happens when your input is 1000x larger? Your current solution handles 100 records. What happens at 100,000? At 10 million? Show me where it breaks."**2. Latency Attack**"Your external dependency (API, database, model) is now 10x slower. What happens to your system? Does it degrade gracefully or cascade-fail?"**3. Data Attack**"Your input data is now adversarial. NoneType where you expected a string. Unicode where you expected ASCII. A 50MB payload where you expected 5KB. An embedding that returns NaN. How does your system respond?"**4. Cost Attack**"Every API call now costs 5x more. Your current design makes N calls per request. At production scale, that's $X/month. Is there a cheaper architecture that achieves 90% of the quality?"**5. Failure Attack**"Your [database / API / model / network] just went down. What does your user see? What does your monitoring see? What's your recovery time? Do you lose data?"### Step 3: Record the ExchangeEvery adversarial review is recorded in the session exchange file as:```markdown## Leadership Stress Test: [component name]**Attack vector:** [which of the five]**The challenge:** [exact scenario posed]**Student's defense:** [how they responded]**Outcome:** [design held / design broke / design needs modification]**Design change (if any):** [what was modified as a result]```### Step 4: Score the Defense| Rating | Meaning ||--------|---------|| **Held** | Student anticipated the failure mode and the design handles it || **Bent** | Student hadn't considered it but could reason about a fix on the spot || **Broke** | Student had no answer -- design needs rework before proceeding |"Bent" is acceptable and expected at early topics. "Broke" means we go back and fix before moving forward.## The Leadership SignalThis isn't hazing. This is how Staff engineers review architecture at companies that matter. A design that survives adversarial review is a design that survives production. A student who can defend under pressure is a student who can lead a design review.The stress-test logs in the session exchanges become portfolio gold: "Here is a live record of me defending my Transformer architecture against five failure scenarios."## What This Changes About the CoachThe coach is NOT always adversarial. The default mode is Socratic teaching. Adversarial mode activates specifically:- After an exercise is "complete" (tests pass)- Before a milestone is accepted- When the student proposes architecture for Topics 6-8- When the student says they're confident about a designThe shift is explicit and announced. The student knows when they're being stress-tested.

Frequently asked questions