bmad-review-adversarial-general

To generate an adversarial findings report, provide your content directly for analysis. The Skill applies a stepwise workflow to challenge assumptions and outputs a prioritized Markdown list highlighting usability flaws, security gaps, and quality concerns.

An adversarial review for quality assurance is a disciplined, skeptical analysis of content to surface critical issues. It systematically challenges specs, diffs, or docs to identify at least ten gaps, risks, and improvement opportunities using a professional tone.

Yes, you can review code diffs, specs, and documents to surface security gaps and quality concerns. The analysis treats the provided content skeptically to identify usability flaws and risks, generating a structured report suitable for stakeholders.

To generate a structured findings report from a document, provide the text for a cynical review. The Skill identifies at least ten issues with a professional tone and outputs a concise Markdown list highlighting risks and improvement opportunities.

The best way to surface critical findings in a spec is through a stepwise adversarial analysis workflow. This methodically challenges assumptions and documents at least ten issues, outputting a clear, prioritized Markdown list of gaps and risks.

An automated adversarial review requires user-provided content to function and focuses strictly on identifying documented gaps and risks. It outputs a Markdown list of findings but does not automatically remediate the identified issues or modify the original source files.