implementation-validator

To validate code changes before merging, an independent skeptic panel reviews the diff to expose defects that contradict stated acceptance claims. It confirms only findings agreed upon by multiple reviewers, calibrates severity based on actual impact, and outputs a persisted Markdown review report.

Adversarial code review dispatches isolated reviewers to attack a diff and refute explicit acceptance claims. It catches defects by keeping only findings confirmed by at least two of three skeptics, calibrating their severity, and documenting failed attacks alongside remediation actions.

Pre-merge verification tests feature implementations and bug fixes by subjecting them to independent adversarial review. It identifies failure paths, edge cases, concurrency behavior, resource correctness, and regression risks by having multiple skeptics attempt to refute the implementation's acceptance claims.

Yes, implementation validation applies to refactoring tasks, diff reviews, and adversarial verification of existing findings. It processes completed code changes by dispatching independent skeptic agents to attack the diff, aggregating confirmed defects through a majority gate, and generating a structured JSON verdict.

The best way to calibrate defect severity during code review is through majority-gate aggregation from an independent skeptic panel. It calibrates severity based on actual impact, filtering out unconfirmed concerns and retaining only defects validated by multiple reviewers in a structured Markdown report.

Implementations can pass tests but fail acceptance claims because standard tests often miss failure paths, edge cases, and concurrency behavior. Pre-merge checks expose these defects by applying adversarial verification where isolated reviewers actively attempt to refute the stated behavior and document regression risks.