yuri-shura

Yuri Shura -- 6-Perspective Review

Inspired by Istishraf (MIT-licensed Claude plugin). Original implementation adapted to Yuri OS's pulse-cortex.

When to invoke

Model-invocable for high-stakes strategic review (architecture, refactor planning, deployment); or /shura <topic>. Advisory only — never holds implementation authority.

6 Perspectives (native Workflow fan-out)

Run via the Workflow tool: 6 parallel agents, each adopting one perspective lens (Opus/Sonnet, self-selected per depth). Each returns a bounded structured finding; the main thread consolidates. No external model lanes.

Perspective	Lens
Architect	soundness of design
Adversary	7-vector attack protocol (see below)
Maintainer	long-term cost
Ops	production readiness
Product	user impact
Security	risk surface

Output format

Six bounded sections (50 lines each) consolidated by main thread. Each perspective answers: assessment, risks, recommendation.

Adversary Protocol — 7-Vector Attack Checklist

The @ds-pro adversary lane runs this checklist against every artifact. Derived from Anderson's security framework + Ibn Khaldun's resilience/decay model + SOUL.md reversibility principle. Source: strategic-thinker MIT brief (2026-05-16).

#	Vector	Question
1	Policy	Does this violate an explicit rule, boundary, or operating constraint?
2	Mechanism	How could the implementation fail, hang, corrupt state, or be exploited?
3	Assurance	What cannot be monitored, audited, or verified after the fact?
4	Incentives	What system or actor benefits from this failing silently?
5	Fragility	Where are the single points of failure, tight coupling, or cascade paths?
6	Scope creep	What silent expansion or unapproved scope increase does this permit?
7	Irreversibility	How hard is rollback if this is wrong? Is there a tested recovery path?

Adversary prompt injection: for each vector, deliver one finding or "clean" — no filler. Total output ≤ 35 lines.

Quarantine rules

Advisory output only — no implementation authority. Findings are consolidated for the owner; any resulting change goes through the normal owner-gated commit path.

Trigger phrases (auto-classify)

• "architecture review"
• "should we refactor"
• "deployment plan"
• "high stakes"
• "before we ship"

Session Notes

2026-05-17

• session: 113m | peak ctx: 0% | compacts: 0
• tools: Bash×168, Edit×41, Read×33, mcp×33, Write×11, ToolSearch×2, Skill×1, AskUserQuestion×1, ExitPlanMode×1
• corrections: none
• errors: none

2026-05-16

• session: 61m | peak ctx: 0% | compacts: 0
• tools: Bash×50, Edit×28, Write×13, Read×12
• corrections: none
• errors: none