interrogate
Use for "interrogate", "adversarial review", "multi-model review", "challenge this", "stress test this code", "find blind spots", or "tear this apart". Adversaries try to break a change or design, and only findings proven by a run survive.
- License 许可
- MIT
- 最近更新
- 2026-11-14
- Stars
- ★ 1
- Forks
- 1
01 前言 Front Matter
- name
- interrogate
- description
- Use for "interrogate", "adversarial review", "multi-model review", "challenge this", "stress test this code", "find blind spots", or "tear this apart". Adversaries try to break a change or design, and only findings proven by a run survive.
- disable-model-invocation
- true
03 SKILL.md 正文
Interrogate
In Claude Code, read the Claude Code adapter once per session before you follow this skill. It maps the Cursor names in pstack skills to Claude Code.
Adversaries try to break a change or a design. A finding survives only when a run proves it. Report the findings. Do not apply fixes.
Frame
The scope is what the user names. Otherwise it is the branch diff from its merge base with the base branch, through the working tree. State the intent with the in-your-own-words skill, from the user's message, the commits, and the PR description. Ask the user when the intent is unclear.
Fan out
Run Phase A steps 3 and 4 and Phase B of the arena skill, with four changes. Read the interrogate reviewers line in place of arena runners. Copy the scope's uncommitted changes into each worktree. Spawn each adversary as generalPurpose. In place of the arena task and rationale, give each adversary the scope, the intent, and this brief:
Break this change. Prove each finding with a run against the real code, such as a failing test, a repro script, or command output that shows the wrong behavior. For a design or plan, run a prototype or probe the current tree. Keep repros in your own worktree. Report each finding with a title, the exact command, the output it printed, and the output the intent requires. Leave out anything you did not run. That covers style, naming, structure, and risks that need a future change to matter. No findings is a valid result.
Verify
Verify each finding per arena Phase F by rerunning its command. Keep a finding when the output shows the failure and the failure breaks the intent. Drop the rest. Merge findings that share a root cause.
Skip arena Phases C, D, and E. Adversaries find different failures, so the verdict keeps every verified finding, not one adversary's list.
Output
- Intent: the restatement.
- Findings: for each verified finding, the command, its output, how it breaks the intent, and the adversaries that found it. Say "no verified findings" when none survive.
- Dropped: for each adversary, the count of dropped findings and why.
04 同仓库更多 Skills
workflow-from-chats
Extract durable working preferences from recent Cursor chats and convert them into skills, rules, or workflow docs. Use when asked to learn preferences, mine feedback, personalize workflows, or generate team/person-specific agent guidance.
why
Use for 'why does X work this way', 'why we picked Y', design rationale, regressions, postmortems, or data-backed thresholds. Discovers available MCPs and queries each evidence category (source control, issue tracker, long-form docs, real-time chat, infrastructure observability, error tracking, product analytics warehouse) in parallel, then returns a cited read on decisions and tradeoffs. Use how for runtime behavior.
what-did-i-get-done
Summarize authored commits over a user-specified time period into a concise update
weekly-review
Produce a weekly synthesis of authored commits with highlights by bugfix, tech debt, and net-new work
verify-this
Verify a claim with fresh local evidence: restate it falsifiably, capture baseline and treatment, compare artifacts, and return VERIFIED, NOT VERIFIED, or INCONCLUSIVE.
typescript-best-practices
TypeScript best practices. Use when reading or editing any .ts or .tsx file.