BB sustainable-opposing-counsel-review
Produces an adversarial attack on a legal argument that survives reply. Runs the opposing-counsel discipline twice: an unrestrained first pass, then the same instrument turned on that pass to cut every point that collapses under challenge - attacks on conceded facts, wrong-forum objections, speculation about documents and motives, gotchas with innocent explanations, overclaims, self-refuting assertions, and padding. The deliverable is one standalone attack containing only what can be defended, capped at five heads, not a discussion of the discarded draft. Use to attack, stress-test, red-team or rebut a submission, brief, motion, witness statement, letter or structured legal reasoning. Triggers on "attack this but only with points that hold", "no cheap shots", "what survives reply", "which points can I actually defend", "give me the version I can file", "double-pass adversarial review". Also use when an earlier adversarial review came back overlong or scattershot. Formal British English.
Produces an adversarial attack on a legal argument that survives reply.
As a process B 69/100 · Nearly there — weak spots: inputs and preconditions, consistency, running it twice
How to improve
- Your own cases (evals/evals.json, 4–6 real requests with expected answers): the full check would then run those instead of a model-drafted suite.
- A spec.yaml with trigger phrases and assertions — a behaviour contract for CI; `skilltest init` writes a template.
Guard findings · 0
✓ No critical or high findings
Files scanned: 5. Evidence is masked. Grey chips explain why severity was lowered.
Against the Agent Skills spec
✓ No remarks against the Agent Skills spec
Process rating: all ten parameters 69/100
- 0Inputs and preconditions. Does not say what the process needs to start
- 0Progress reporting. Says nothing while it works
- 30Running it twice. 3 mutating operations with no state check
- 40Consistency. Frontmatter name (sustainable-opposing-counsel-review) differs from the folder (sustainable-opposing-counsel-review-seth-chandler)
- 55Failures and branches. 1 branches
- 60Result and completion. Output format stated, no completion criterion
- 100Tools and files. No external tools needed
- 100Steps. 17 steps
- 100When it triggers. States when to use and when not to
- 100Execution cost. Instruction body is 2315 tokens
- medium Safety rules and hard prohibitions inside a skill: they belong in the system prompt, here they protect nothing
Everything here is measured from the skill text rather than judged by a model, so the numbers are checkable. A parameter weighs more when it is a more common reason for the process to stall.
Quality signals
- +4Description does not say when NOT to use the skill (false activations)
- +3Description length 1001: 120–800 characters recommended
- +4No input/output examples
- +2Single-language instructions
- +5Description quotes 6 example trigger phrases
- +4Structure: 13 headings
- +3Step-by-step instructions: 17 items
- +3Output format is stated explicitly
- +1License stated
Quality base 70; lint remarks subtract, signals add up to 100. Result: 86.