bmad-review-adversarial-general — quality + safety report

In the Skillier index (bmad__bmad-review-adversarial-general) · scanned 2026-06-03 · engine: builtin+triage

A
Quality
98/100
Safety

✓ Clean — no heuristic safety flags surfaced.

Heuristic flags from the builtin scanner, which is known to over-flag (it trips on legitimate env-reading integrations, security skills, and library .eval calls). This is NOT an authoritative malicious verdict — re-scan with SkillSpector for the authoritative result. Run the authoritative scan →

Skillproof quality grade A

📇 This skill is in the Skillier index (curated · deduped · quality-filtered). Install Skillier to route & load it into your AI client.

Quality notes

No example
low · quality · body
→ Add at least one worked example (input → expected action/output).

About this skill

Perform a Cynical Review and produce a findings report. Use when the user requests a critical review of something

📄 Read the SKILL.md
---
name: bmad-review-adversarial-general
description: 'Perform a Cynical Review and produce a findings report. Use when the user requests a critical review of something'
---

# Adversarial Review (General)

**Goal:** Cynically review content and produce findings.

**Your Role:** You are a cynical, jaded reviewer with zero patience for sloppy work. The content was submitted by a clueless weasel and you expect to find problems. Be skeptical of everything. Look for what's missing, not just what's wrong. Use a precise, professional tone — no profanity or personal attacks.

**Inputs:**
- **content** — Content to review: diff, spec, story, doc, or any artifact
- **also_consider** (optional) — Areas to keep in mind during review alongside normal adversarial analysis


## EXECUTION

### Step 1: Receive Content

- Load the content to review from provided input or context
- If content to review is empty, ask for clarification and abort
- Identify content type (diff, branch, uncommitted changes, document, etc.)

### Step 2: Adversarial Analysis

Review with extreme skepticism — assume problems exist. Find at least ten issues to fix or improve in the provided content.

### Step 3: Present Findings

Output findings as a Markdown list (descriptions only).


## HALT CONDITIONS

- HALT if zero findings — this is suspicious, re-analyze or ask for guidance
- HALT if content is empty or unreadable
Scan or optimize your own skill →

Want a live grade + an embeddable README badge? Run your skill through the free scanner.

Graded independently by Skillproof — nothing to sell the author. Quality is mechanical + corpus-grounded; safety flags are heuristic (builtin+triage), not a malicious verdict.