ワンクリックで
red-team-review
Bias-aware adversarial review for any artifact before shipping. 5-phase QA protocol with severity-weighted findings.
Codex または Claude でインストール この Prompt をコピーして Codex、Claude、または他のアシスタントに貼り付けると、Skill ページを確認してインストールできます。
メニュー
Bias-aware adversarial review for any artifact before shipping. 5-phase QA protocol with severity-weighted findings.
Codex または Claude でインストール この Prompt をコピーして Codex、Claude、または他のアシスタントに貼り付けると、Skill ページを確認してインストールできます。
SOC 職業分類に基づく
Unified business model evaluator, client filter, pricing engine, and distribution architect. Absorbs 31 business + 8 marketing + 13 content + 2 acquisition protocols.
Unified codebase manipulation, AI deployment, data analysis, and academic delivery engine. Absorbs 6 coding protocols + data-analysis + academic-delivery + spec-driven-dev.
Unified mathematical arbitrator for all resource allocation decisions — money, time, energy, relationships. Absorbs 46 decision protocols + 24 strategy protocols into one dense engine.
Unified survival infrastructure: health, finance, legal safety, circuit breakers, and structural protection against all ruin classes. The last line of defense.
Unified boundary enforcement, interpersonal diagnostic, and relational audit engine. Absorbs 40 psychology + 2 social protocols and all relationship case studies.
Unified zero-emotion variance shield for capital markets (FX, crypto, CFDs) and poker. Absorbs trading-risk-gate + zenith-execution + trade-journal-analyzer into one engine.
| name | Red-Team Review |
| description | Bias-aware adversarial review for any artifact before shipping. 5-phase QA protocol with severity-weighted findings. |
| created | "2026-02-27T00:00:00.000Z" |
| auto-invoke | true |
| model | default |
| context_trigger | review, red team, what did I miss, QA, bias check, critique, pre-mortem, is this ready, stress test, adversarial |
Philosophy: Find what you both missed. Assume shared blind spots.
Before shipping any significant artifact — blog post, code, protocol, proposal, design doc. Best used with a different model than the one that created the artifact.
Copy this prompt and paste the artifact to be reviewed where indicated:
# RED-TEAM REVIEW
You are reviewing an artifact. Your job: Find what WE BOTH missed.
## THE ARTIFACT
<paste artifact here>
---
## PHASE 0: DECLARE YOUR PRIORS
Before reviewing, state:
1. What thesis does this artifact assume?
2. What would falsify that thesis?
3. What perspective is NOT represented?
## PHASE 1: ADVERSARIAL LENSES
Review through EACH perspective:
| Lens | Question |
|------|----------|
| **The Skeptic** | What would someone who disagrees say? |
| **The User** | Who is harmed or disadvantaged? |
| **The Regulator** | What legal/ethical exposure exists? |
| **The Cynic** | What hidden incentive might be driving this? |
| **The Future** | How does this look in 5 years? |
## PHASE 2: BIAS CHECKLIST
Flag if present:
- [ ] Sycophancy — Did I just validate the creator's view?
- [ ] Cherry-Picking — Is counter-evidence missing?
- [ ] False Precision — Are numbers unjustified?
- [ ] Complexity Bias — Is a simpler explanation ignored?
## PHASE 3: SEVERITY-WEIGHTED FINDINGS
- 🔴 CRITICAL: Immediate failure if shipped
- 🟠 HIGH: Significantly reduces value
- 🟡 MEDIUM: Missed upside
- 🟢 LOW: Polish
## PHASE 4: SCORE (0-100)
Your Score: [ ] / 100
## PHASE 5: UNCERTAINTY
"I am least confident about ___ because ___."