| name | second-opinion |
| description | Use when asked to get a second opinion on a finished DRAFT, fact-check or double-check a report's claims against its evidence, sanity-check before sign-off, or red-team an output for fabrication / overreach / invented IDs — even without the word "honesty". Works on an agentic-sop-kit run dir (FULL, uses the run's trace) or any plain document (DEGRADED, you supply the inputs). ｜ 要對一份已完成的 DRAFT 取得「第二意見」、在核准前查核報告主張是否有輸入佐證、抓臆造／灌水／過度宣稱／捏造編號時使用；吃 agentic-sop-kit 的 run 目錄（FULL，用 trace）或任何純文件（DEGRADED，需自備輸入）。不適用：稽核 agent 架構有沒有拆好／是不是 mega-agent（改用 agentic-workflow-audit）；審查原始碼品質／bug／資安（改用 /code-review）。本 skill 只查「這次產出的主張 vs. 證據」誠實度，只產 DRAFT，核准永遠人擁有。 |
Second Opinion — adversarial honesty reviewer
An independent, skeptical second reader for a finished DRAFT. It checks whether every
claim is backed by its evidence and hands back a findings report — which is itself a DRAFT.
A human decides.
When to use / not use
- Use when: "get a second opinion on this report", "is this draft trustworthy / honest",
"double-check the numbers before I sign", "red-team this output", "did it make anything up?"
- Not for architecture ("is my workflow decomposed / a mega-agent?") →
agentic-workflow-audit.
- Not for source-code quality / bugs / security →
/code-review, /security-review.
Second Opinion reads a produced artifact's claims vs its cited evidence, in any domain.
What it catches (domain-neutral)
- #1 wrong PASS/FAIL or spec-limit verdicts, and aggregates that don't recompute.
- #2 numbers with no matching source token (fabrication / transcription error).
- #3 invented identifiers / dates / names with no provenance (should be
【待補】).
- #4 conclusions the data don't support (overreach) — advisory.
How it works (two layers; the guarantees are in CODE, not this prose)
- Deterministic layer (stdlib, hermetic): catches
#1/#2/#3. In FULL mode these are
HARD at confidence 1.0 (the kit trace is authoritative); in DEGRADED mode they are
SOFT at 0.5 (provenance reconstructed from supplied inputs).
- Advisory LLM layer (you): catches
#4 and fuzzy #1. It is capped
(SECONDOP_MAX_LLM_PASSES, default 1) and every finding is clamped to SOFT / advisory /
confidence ≤ 0.5, dropped unless it cites a verbatim draft span (or NO SOURCE), and
suppressed if it re-litigates a slot the deterministic layer already settled.
To run it
Invoke the /second-opinion command, which orchestrates the deterministic pass → your
capped advisory pass → the code-enforced fold-in → the human STOP. Modes:
/second-opinion <run_dir> — FULL (an agentic-sop-kit run dir)/second-opinion <doc> --inputs <file...> — DEGRADED (any document)/second-opinion — the bundled cross-domain demo
Iron rules
- Facts only from inputs; unknowns are
【待補】; never invent numbers / IDs / dates / conclusions
— and the red-team itself may not invent accusations (the evidence gate enforces this).
- The deterministic checks are the only HARD signal; the LLM pass is advisory + capped, in code.
- The report is a DRAFT. A human owns approve / reject. Never auto-approve, never auto-file.
- Real enforcement lives in the code (clamp / evidence-gate / cap) and the optional Stop-hook —
not in this prose.
