adversarial-reviewer
Review code through three hostile personas - the Saboteur, the New Hire, and the Security Auditor - each required to find at least one issue. Use when a…
Relentlessly stress-test a plan, design, architecture, idea, or strategy until all critical decisions are resolved. Use when a plan, design, or decision needs adversarial stress-testing before committing to it.
$ npx -y skills add KhaledSaeed18/dotclaude --skill grill-me --agent claude-codeHow it fires
How this skill gets triggered: by you, by Claude, or both.
/grill-meContext preview
The summary Claude sees to decide when to auto-load this skill.
Relentlessly stress-test a plan, design, architecture, idea, or strategy until all critical decisions are resolved. Use when a plan, design, or decision needs adversarial stress-testing before committing to it.
name: grill-me description: Relentlessly stress-test a plan, design, architecture, idea, or strategy until all critical decisions are resolved. Use when a plan, design, or decision needs adversarial stress-testing before committing to it. argument-hint: "(optional) the plan, design, or idea to stress-test; paste it or point to a file"
Interview me relentlessly about every aspect of this plan until we reach a shared understanding. Walk down each branch of the decision tree, resolving dependencies between decisions one by one.
If arguments were passed, treat them as the subject to grill. Otherwise, ask what to stress-test before starting. If a question can be answered by exploring the codebase or reading existing files, do that instead of asking.
**NEVER** use the AskUserQuestion tool; ask questions as plain text output.
**ONE question per turn. Then STOP. Wait for reply.** No lists. No "and also". No follow-ups. No bundled sub-questions. One `?` per response. Violating this defeats the skill; the user needs space to think, not a wall of questions.
If a question leads to more nested branches, move those to a new question. Never nest question numbers.
Index each question as **Q1, Q2, Q3, …**
1. Explain why the question matters. 2. Ask exactly one question. 3. Present the options as labeled choices (**A, B, C, …**) covering the realistic alternatives. Mark your recommended option with `← recommended`. Example:
**A.** Option one ← recommended **B.** Option two **C.** Option three
The user can reply with just a letter. If they pick a non-recommended option, acknowledge the tradeoff before moving on.
Produce a decision record covering:
1. **Restated plan**: the full plan as understood, end-to-end. 2. **Resolved decisions**: every key decision made and its rationale. 3. **Open questions**: anything still unresolved, with the risk if left open. 4. **Risks & mitigations**: identified risks and suggested mitigations.
Reusable Claude Code extension registry. skills, subagents, slash commands, and hooks for engineering, git, testing, and security workflows. Distributed as a shadcn GitHub registry and as installable plugins.
Repo: KhaledSaeed18/dotclaude
Review code through three hostile personas - the Saboteur, the New Hire, and the Security Auditor - each required to find at least one issue. Use when a…
Review an API contract (REST or GraphQL) before or while it is implemented, checking resource naming, HTTP semantics, status codes, error shape, pagination,…
Process code-review feedback with technical rigour — understand each point, check it against the actual codebase, and respond with reasoning or implementation…
Author a new subagent for this repository end to end by scaffolding it with pnpm new, curating its tool allowlist, setting model, color, and memory in…
Author a new slash command for this repository end to end by scaffolding it with pnpm new, writing the frontmatter and argument handling, drafting the prompt…
Author a new Claude Code hook for this repository end to end by scaffolding it with pnpm new, writing the hook script and its settings.json wiring, documenting…