feat: adversarial prompt rewrite + README + example
- Rewrite all review prompts with XML-structured adversarial stance (role, operating_stance, attack_surface, finding_bar, calibration) - Rename skill from codex-review to adversarial-review - Add verbatim output rule for reviewer findings - Improve resume prompt with adversarial re-review focus - Add README with installation, usage, architecture, roadmap - Add synthetic example of review output - Inspired by openai/codex-plugin-cc (Apache-2.0) prompt structure Co-Authored-By: Claude Opus 4.6 (1M context) <noreply@anthropic.com>
This commit is contained in:
@@ -0,0 +1,154 @@
|
||||
# Adversarial Review
|
||||
|
||||
Claude Code skill for adversarial AI code and plan review.
|
||||
|
||||
One AI writes the code. Another tears it apart. Iterate until approved.
|
||||
|
||||
## What is this
|
||||
|
||||
Most AI code review tools validate your changes — "looks good, maybe add tests."
|
||||
Adversarial review does the opposite: the reviewer **defaults to skepticism**
|
||||
and tries to break confidence in the change. It looks for what will fail
|
||||
in production, not what might be nice to improve.
|
||||
|
||||
This is a [Claude Code skill](https://docs.anthropic.com/en/docs/claude-code)
|
||||
— a single `SKILL.md` file that teaches Claude how to run adversarial reviews
|
||||
through an external AI model (currently OpenAI Codex).
|
||||
|
||||
## Key features
|
||||
|
||||
**Two stages** — works on both planning and implementation:
|
||||
- **Plan review** — review the plan BEFORE writing code. Catch architecture
|
||||
mistakes, missing steps, and risks early
|
||||
- **Code review** — review the implementation. Bugs, security, data loss
|
||||
- **Code-vs-plan** — verify the implementation matches the plan
|
||||
|
||||
**Lightweight** — one file, no server, no broker, no dependencies beyond
|
||||
the reviewer CLI. Compare with [codex-plugin-cc](https://github.com/openai/codex-plugin-cc):
|
||||
~15 JS modules, App Server, JSON-RPC broker, lifecycle hooks.
|
||||
This skill is a text instruction that any AI agent can interpret.
|
||||
|
||||
**Iterative** — Claude doesn't just show the review and stop.
|
||||
It actively fixes issues based on reviewer feedback and resubmits
|
||||
for re-review. Up to 5 rounds until approved.
|
||||
|
||||
**Universal foundation** — the skill relies on basic agent capabilities:
|
||||
run a command, read a file, edit a file. The reviewer is a swappable
|
||||
component: today Codex, tomorrow Gemini CLI, next week a local model.
|
||||
Switching backends = changing one launch command; prompts and workflow stay the same.
|
||||
|
||||
## How it works
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
┌─────────┐ ┌──────────┐ ┌─────────┐
|
||||
│ Claude │────>│ Reviewer │────>│ Claude │
|
||||
│ (code) │ │ (Codex) │ │ (fix) │
|
||||
└─────────┘ └──────────┘ └─────────┘
|
||||
^ │
|
||||
│ ┌──────────┐ │
|
||||
└─────────│ Reviewer │<───────────┘
|
||||
│(re-review)│
|
||||
└──────────┘
|
||||
│
|
||||
VERDICT: APPROVED
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
### Three modes
|
||||
|
||||
| Mode | What it reviews | When to use |
|
||||
|------|----------------|-------------|
|
||||
| `plan` | Implementation plan | Before writing code |
|
||||
| `code` | Git diff (unstaged, staged, or branch) | After writing code |
|
||||
| `code-vs-plan` | Code changes against the plan | Verify implementation matches plan |
|
||||
|
||||
Mode is auto-detected from context, or you can force it with an argument.
|
||||
|
||||
## Installation
|
||||
|
||||
### Requirements
|
||||
|
||||
- [Claude Code](https://docs.anthropic.com/en/docs/claude-code)
|
||||
- [OpenAI Codex CLI](https://github.com/openai/codex): `npm install -g @openai/codex`
|
||||
- OpenAI API key (`OPENAI_API_KEY` environment variable)
|
||||
|
||||
### Setup
|
||||
|
||||
```bash
|
||||
# Clone the repository
|
||||
git clone https://github.com/<your-username>/adversarial-review.git
|
||||
|
||||
# Symlink into Claude Code skills directory
|
||||
ln -s "$(pwd)/adversarial-review" ~/.agents/skills/adversarial-review
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
After symlinking, the skill is available as `/adversarial-review` in Claude Code.
|
||||
|
||||
## Usage
|
||||
|
||||
```
|
||||
# Auto-detect what to review
|
||||
/adversarial-review
|
||||
|
||||
# Review a plan
|
||||
/adversarial-review plan
|
||||
|
||||
# Review code changes
|
||||
/adversarial-review code
|
||||
|
||||
# Review a specific file
|
||||
/adversarial-review path/to/plan.md
|
||||
|
||||
# Use higher reasoning effort
|
||||
/adversarial-review xhigh
|
||||
|
||||
# Use a different model
|
||||
/adversarial-review model:gpt-5.3-codex
|
||||
```
|
||||
|
||||
## Prompt architecture
|
||||
|
||||
The skill uses XML-structured prompts inspired by adversarial review methodology:
|
||||
|
||||
- **`<role>`** — adversarial reviewer, defaults to skepticism
|
||||
- **`<operating_stance>`** — break confidence, not validate
|
||||
- **`<attack_surface>`** — concrete checklist: auth, data integrity,
|
||||
race conditions, rollback safety, schema drift, error handling, observability
|
||||
- **`<finding_bar>`** — every finding must answer 4 questions:
|
||||
what can go wrong, why this code is vulnerable, impact, recommendation
|
||||
- **`<scope_exclusions>`** — no style, naming, or speculative comments
|
||||
- **`<calibration>`** — one strong finding > five weak ones
|
||||
|
||||
## Example output
|
||||
|
||||
See [examples/review-output.md](examples/review-output.md) for a sample
|
||||
adversarial review output.
|
||||
|
||||
## Roadmap
|
||||
|
||||
- [ ] Gemini as alternative reviewer backend
|
||||
- [ ] Local model support (Ollama, llama.cpp)
|
||||
- [ ] CI integration (GitHub Actions)
|
||||
- [ ] Multi-reviewer mode (parallel review by multiple models)
|
||||
|
||||
## Inspiration
|
||||
|
||||
The adversarial prompt structure was developed after studying
|
||||
[openai/codex-plugin-cc](https://github.com/openai/codex-plugin-cc) (Apache-2.0)
|
||||
— the official OpenAI plugin for code review with Codex in Claude Code.
|
||||
|
||||
What we borrowed as ideas:
|
||||
- XML-structured prompts (`<role>`, `<operating_stance>`, `<attack_surface>`, etc.)
|
||||
- Adversarial stance: "break confidence, not validate"
|
||||
- Attack surface checklist approach
|
||||
- Finding bar: 4 questions each finding must answer
|
||||
- Calibration rules: prefer strong findings over weak ones
|
||||
|
||||
What we did differently:
|
||||
- **Iterative loop** — Claude actively fixes issues and resubmits (vs "stop and ask user")
|
||||
- **Plan review** — reviews plans before code, not just code
|
||||
- **Single file** — one SKILL.md vs 15+ JS modules with App Server
|
||||
- **Verbatim output** — reviewer findings shown as-is, not rephrased
|
||||
|
||||
## License
|
||||
|
||||
Apache-2.0 — see [LICENSE](LICENSE).
|
||||
Reference in New Issue
Block a user