| name | adversarial-search-campaign |
| description | Analyze adversarial route/search campaigns with canonical commands, expected artifacts, status boundaries, and claim limits. |
| category | campaign-analysis |
| kind | analysis |
| phase | analysis |
| requires_write | true |
| requires_slurm | false |
| requires_benchmark_artifacts | true |
| delegates_to | ["benchmark-row-status","artifact-provenance","evidence-synthesis"] |
| output_schema | benchmark_analysis_summary.v1 |
Adversarial Search Campaign
When to use
Use this skill for the campaign lane named by the title when you need canonical command surfaces, expected artifacts, row-status handling, and conservative claim boundaries.
Command surfaces
Start with scripts/tools/compare_adversarial_samplers.py, scripts/tools/generate_adversarial_routes.py, and adversarial failure archives. Prefer config-first commands and existing validation launch-packet scripts when available.
Workflow
- Record route sampler, scenario split, seed schedule, failure archive, and fallback/degraded counts.
- Capture commit SHA, config path, command, output root, seeds, and expected artifacts.
- Classify each planner/scenario row with
benchmark-row-status when benchmark rows exist.
- Classify generated outputs with
artifact-provenance.
- Feed multi-source conclusions through
evidence-synthesis.
Guardrails
- Do not count fallback or degraded runs as success evidence.
- Do not make paper-facing or population-level claims beyond the inspected evidence.
- Keep raw generated outputs out of git unless they are deliberate compact fixtures.
Output
Use the output_schema declared in frontmatter.