| name | adversarial-qa |
| description | Use only when the user explicitly requests adversarial, hostile, end-to-end, or release-gate QA beyond the project's normal verification suite. |
Adversarial QA
Try to disprove release readiness using high-value hostile scenarios. This is an explicit heavyweight workflow, not a default completion step.
Scenario matrix
Select applicable categories:
- malformed, missing, oversized, or boundary input;
- interruption, retry, timeout, partial failure, and recovery;
- concurrent or reordered operations;
- stale caches, state, credentials, or version skew;
- authorization, injection, traversal, and trust-boundary abuse;
- misleading success output or silent data loss;
- upgrade, rollback, and compatibility behavior;
- accessibility, responsive layout, or interaction-state failures for UI work.
Prioritize scenarios by impact and likelihood. Do not generate a large checklist merely to appear thorough.
Loop
- Define the release claim and normal verification baseline.
- Create a bounded scenario matrix with expected outcomes.
- Run the highest-value scenarios and capture exact evidence.
- Classify failures by root cause, severity, and reproducibility.
- Fix only when the user asked for remediation; otherwise report.
- Re-run failed scenarios plus the normal regression suite.
- Clean up temporary data and processes.
Use operating-system temporary storage for QA artifacts unless the user requests a durable report.
Verdict
Return PASS, FAIL, or PARTIAL, with:
- scenarios executed;
- failures and reproductions;
- fixes and re-test evidence, if authorized;
- skipped scenarios and why;
- remaining release risk.
