challenge

Solid

Use before a root-cause, done/verified claim, irreversible action, or 2nd-time fix reaches the owner (APEX or plain conversation); also fires at every eLicit/Verify gate. Not for code correctness (use sniper).

AI & Automation 25 stars 4 forks Updated 6 days ago MIT

Install

View on GitHub

Quality Score: 81/100

Stars 20%
47
Recency 20%
100
Frontmatter 20%
70
Documentation 15%
100
Issue Health 10%
80
License 10%
100
Description 5%
100

Skill Content

<objective> Challenge is the adversarial verification protocol behind the `challenger` agent: refute-by-default, fresh-context intake (claim + evidence only, never the author's reasoning), sources-backed (Context7 -> Exa -> fuse-browser -> code), bounded to 2 refutation rounds ending in a mandatory verdict (CONFIRMED / REFUTED / UNCERTAIN). It is consultative, not a veto -- it reports the strongest objection and leaves the decision to the lead/owner. It fires systematically by claim TYPE, not by a stakes judgment: before a root-cause conclusion, a done/verified claim, an irreversible action (commit/deploy/rm/push), or a 2nd-time fix reaches the owner, whether inside an APEX task or in plain conversation -- plus automatically at every APEX eLicit round and Verify gate. It does not cover code correctness, lint, or type validation -- that stays sniper's lane at eXamine. </objective> # Challenge Skill Reusable protocol behind the `challenger` agent. Also usable directly inside any expert agent's own eLicit step when a dedicated agent call is overkill -- the discipline is the same either way. ## The 7 Principles 1. **Refute by default** -- a claim is FALSE until proven otherwise. Never "are you sure?" -- always a concrete failure scenario + the untested hypothesis it exposes. 2. **Fresh context mandatory** -- intake is the claim + its evidence ONLY, never the author's reasoning. Inheriting the author's angle reproduces the author's blind spot. 3. **Real sources, never memory*...

Details

Author
fusengine
Repository
fusengine/agents
Created
8 months ago
Last Updated
6 days ago
Language
CSS
License
MIT

Similar Skills

Semantically similar based on skill content — not just same category

AI & Automation Listed

edge-case-challenger

Challenge a working assumption or a settled decision that nobody re-questions, by running a fixed set of probes against the ONE decision, not by free-associating about what could break. Use when something has worked long enough to feel settled and the user wants it pressure-tested: '여태 이렇게 해왔는데', '이 가정 맞나', '전제를 다시 보자', '엣지 케이스', '스케일업하면?', '이거 언젠가 터지지 않나', 'pressure-test this assumption', 'what breaks at scale', 'challenge this decision', 'is this premise still true', 'stress this at 10x', or when a decision passed review on one axis and no one checked the others.

0 Updated 4 weeks ago
taewanu
AI & Automation Listed

challenge

Two-phase challenge that judges whether a discovered problem is real and whether a proposed idea is usable. Phase 1 loops subagent verification and advisor judgment over evidence (OUTCOME.md + parallel subagents) to self-resolve design-tree branches. It asks the user only the irreversible branches that remain and proceeds on stated assumptions for the rest. Phase 2 spawns two critic-design subagents (internal attack / OUTCOME.md attack) as devil's advocate input. The verdict leads the output as a simple GO / NO-GO. Do NOT use for code review findings (use the audit workflow) or outcome assertion (use /assert which has built-in adversarial testing).

12 Updated today
thkt
AI & Automation Listed

devils-advocate

Use when about to commit to a decision, plan, conclusion, or recommendation and it needs to be attacked before anyone acts on it — especially when everyone already agrees, money or time is already sunk, a deadline is pushing toward yes, or the user says "poke holes", "stress test", "red team", "what am I missing".

0 Updated yesterday
hadicancatak-coder