| name | adversarial-bug-hunt |
| description | Discover bugs through a 3-agent adversarial pipeline (finder → adversarial → referee) that exploits sycophancy for high-fidelity results. Use when reviewing code for bugs, especially when single-agent review isn't sufficient. |
| version | 1.0.1 |
| level | advanced |
| category | code-quality |
Adversarial Bug Hunt
Three-agent bug discovery pipeline. A bug-finder over-reports, an adversarial agent disproves, a referee resolves. Each agent runs in a clean context to prevent cross-contamination.
Constraints
- Read
gotchas.md before starting
- Each agent MUST be a separate
Agent tool launch — never reuse context between agents
- Scoring numbers are a prompt technique — they bias agent behavior via sycophancy, they are not tracked
- The referee is told "ground truth exists" — this is intentional design that makes it more careful, not a mistake
- Do NOT perform your own code review — your job is orchestration and presentation only
- All agents must produce structured JSON output
Phase 0 — Determine Scope
If the user provided a scope (files, directory, "uncommitted changes"), use it. Otherwise ask. Default: uncommitted changes.
Phase 1 — Bug-Finder Agent
Read references/agent-prompts.md for the bug-finder prompt template.
Launch an Agent (general-purpose) with the bug-finder prompt, passing the scope. This agent is incentivized to over-report — it produces the superset of all possible bugs.
Receives: JSON array of findings using the schema in templates/finding-schema.json.
Phase 2 — Adversarial Agent
Read references/agent-prompts.md for the adversarial prompt template.
Launch an Agent (general-purpose) with the adversarial prompt, passing the bug-finder's full output. This agent is incentivized to disprove — it produces the subset of likely real bugs.
Receives: same findings array, each annotated with adversarial_verdict and adversarial_reasoning.
Phase 3 — Referee Agent
Read references/agent-prompts.md for the referee prompt template.
Launch an Agent (general-purpose) with both agents' outputs. The referee resolves each dispute.
Receives: same findings array, each annotated with referee_verdict and referee_reasoning.
Phase 4 — Present Results
Read references/report-format.md for display format. See examples/ for concrete samples.
Show only CONFIRMED + UNCERTAIN findings. If all findings are DISPROVED: say "No confirmed issues found in the reviewed code." and stop.
Otherwise, ask the user which finding IDs to fix:
"Which issues would you like me to fix? You can list IDs (e.g., BUG-001, BUG-003) or say 'all'."
CRITICAL — next turn action: When the user replies, your very first tool call MUST be EnterPlanMode. The plan must reference the specific findings, evidence, and fix recommendations from the report.
