RedTeam

Deploy 32 agents to critique and counter-argue proposals.

1|Updated Jan 24, 2026
One-click install
npx skills add https://github.com/verrio1/vaughn-pai --skill redteam-verrio1
Or copy as Structured Prompt for Agent
Please help me install this Agent Skill.
Skill: RedTeam
Source: https://github.com/verrio1/vaughn-pai/tree/main/skills/RedTeam
Command: npx skills add https://github.com/verrio1/vaughn-pai --skill redteam-verrio1

SYSTEM DOCUMENTATION & REQUIREMENTS

What problem does it solve?

This skill provides rigorous adversarial analysis by deploying 32 expert-focused agents to critique, deconstruct, and counter-argue ideas, ensuring robust decision-making.

Core Features & Use Cases

  • 32-agent parallel critique: 8 engineers, 8 architects, 8 pentesters, 8 interns, each offering unique angles.
  • 24-claim decomposition + 5-phase protocol: Breaks arguments into atomic parts and yields steelman + counter-argument.
  • FirstPrinciples integration: Leverages FirstPrinciples/Deconstruct and FirstPrinciples/Challenge to surface assumptions.
  • Output formats: Steelman and 8-point counter-argument, plus synthesis when needed.
  • Use cases: Evaluate architecture proposals, policy changes, or strategic plans with rigorous adversarial scrutiny.

Quick Start

Provide the argument you want analyzed and choose a workflow (ParallelAnalysis or AdversarialValidation) to run.

Frequently Asked Questions about RedTeam

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

FAQPage Schema
How do I stress-test an architecture proposal using adversarial analysis?

To stress-test an architecture proposal, provide your argument to the system and choose a ParallelAnalysis or AdversarialValidation workflow. The 32-agent system then executes a 5-phase protocol to break your argument into atomic parts, outputting both a steelman and an 8-point counter-argument for rigorous adversarial validation.

What is the best way to generate a steelman and counter-argument for a strategic plan?

The best way to generate a steelman and counter-argument is using a 24-claim decomposition protocol that breaks strategic plans into atomic parts. This approach yields a structured 8-point counter-argument by leveraging FirstPrinciples integration to deeply examine foundational constraints and surface hidden assumptions.

Can I evaluate policy changes using parallel analysis from multiple expert perspectives?

Yes, you can evaluate policy changes using parallel analysis by deploying 32 expert-focused agents across 8 engineers, 8 architects, 8 pentesters, and 8 interns. Each persona offers a unique critique angle, ensuring your policy changes undergo rigorous adversarial scrutiny from diverse professional viewpoints.

Does this adversarial analysis tool integrate with FirstPrinciples for examining assumptions?

Yes, the adversarial analysis directly integrates with FirstPrinciples tools, leveraging FirstPrinciples/Deconstruct and FirstPrinciples/Challenge to surface and examine foundational assumptions. This integration allows for deeper constraint examination during the 5-phase parallel analysis of your proposals and strategic decisions.

What are the limitations of using automated agents for counter-argument generation?

The primary limitation of using automated agents for counter-argument generation is that the critique quality depends entirely on the initial argument provided. While the 32 agents execute a structured 5-phase protocol, they cannot verify external real-world viability, meaning human synthesis is still required for final strategic decisions.