skills.rest
ThibautBaissac
ThibautBaissacCOMMUNITY
Explore all skills by this author →
GitHub

friction-review

Routes design artifacts through five parallel adversarial reviewers producing a consolidated friction report.

659|81|Updated Dec 9, 2025
Search Tags:#design review#ADR#pre-implementation#Rails#ARCHITECTURE#adversarial review#Multi-Agent
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/ThibautBaissac/rails_ai_agents --skill friction-review
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent▼
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: friction-review
Source: https://github.com/ThibautBaissac/rails_ai_agents/tree/main/.agents/skills/friction-review
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/ThibautBaissac/rails_ai_agents --skill friction-review

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

Design artifacts like specs, ADRs, service designs, and schemas often contain hidden assumptions and blind spots that only surface during implementation. This Skill catches those issues early by subjecting the artifact to multi-axis adversarial review before any code is written.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • Five Parallel Reviewers: Spawns Architecture, Implementation, Testability, Security, and Simplicity reviewer subagents simultaneously, each with explicit prohibitions to keep axes independent.
  • Friction Marker Taxonomy: Every finding is tagged [sound], [contestable], [blind_spot], or [refuted] for consistent, comparable assessments.
  • Consolidated Friction Report: Merges findings into a structured report with arbitration items, ratified positions, and next steps for human decision-making.
  • Use Case: Before implementing a new Rails service object design, run the review to surface N+1 risks, missing authorization checks, and premature abstractions, then arbitrate contested points with your team.

Quick Start

Ask the AI to run a friction review on your design document, for example by providing the path to your spec or ADR file and requesting a friction review before implementation.

Frequently Asked Questions about friction-review

High-intent search queries and answers about installing and using this skill.

FAQPage Schema
How do I review a design document before implementation?▼

Provide the file path or description of your spec, ADR, service design, or schema as the argument. The skill reads the artifact, spawns five parallel reviewer subagents, and returns a consolidated friction report with tagged findings.

What review axes does an adversarial design review cover?▼

This review covers five axes: architecture, implementation, testability, security, and simplicity. Each reviewer has explicit prohibitions preventing overlap, so findings stay independent and comparable across axes.

When should I not use friction review?▼

Skip it for code already written (use a code review instead), routine CRUD with no design decisions, quick one-off questions, and post-implementation reviews. It targets pre-implementation design artifacts only.

What do the friction markers [sound] and [blind_spot] mean?▼

[sound] means the position is well-founded on that axis, while [blind_spot] flags something the artifact fails to address. [contestable] marks valid-but-debatable choices and [refuted] identifies mistakes with explanations.

Does friction review make the final design decisions?▼

No. The orchestrator surfaces conflicts between axes as arbitration items but never resolves them. A human must decide contested points, while positions rated [sound] across three or more axes become ratified constraints for implementation.

Related Skills

Explore More Software Engineering Skills→
highflame-aihighflame-ai
4

grill-feature

Perform adversarial design reviews for cross-service software changes.

Official
Advanced
faroukBakarifaroukBakari
5

ia-constraint-design

Calibrate agent constraints as tunable spectrums with a phase-based workflow.

Community
Advanced
igot-aiigot-ai

shape

Run a structured discovery interview and generate a design brief.

Official
Intermediate
LazyIsEfficientLazyIsEfficient
15

code-review-and-quality

Evaluate code changes across correctness, readability, architecture, security, and performance.

Official
Advanced