red-teaming

name	red-teaming
description	Campaign: Systematic adversarial attack from military/intelligence/AI-safety traditions. Core question: Can systematic adversarial attacks find fatal flaws? Methods: UFMCS Red Team Handbook v9.0, CIA SAT, Anthropic Red Teaming, NIST AI RMF, Inie et al. 12-strategy taxonomy.
type	campaign
produces	RedTeamReport
artifact-types	["gap","hypothesis","research-question","idea","approach","experiment-design","claim"]
dependencies	{"strategies":["adversarial-persona","alternative-analysis","groupthink-mitigation","stress-test-assumption-challenge","systematic-probing"],"tactics":["adversarial-roleplay","assumption-cascade","structured-attack-campaign"],"sops":["context-checkpoint","context-init","mitigation-proposal","stress-test-saturation-detection","verdict-synthesis","weakness-classification"]}

Red Teaming Campaign

Core question: Can systematic adversarial attacks find fatal flaws in this artifact?

Methodology Sources

• UFMCS Red Team Handbook v9.0 — Military structured analytic techniques
• CIA Structured Analytic Techniques (SAT) — Key Assumptions Check, Devil's Advocacy
• Anthropic Red Teaming (2022) — AI-safety systematic probing methodology
• NIST AI Risk Management Framework — Threat surface enumeration
• Inie et al. (2024) — 12-strategy taxonomy of adversarial attacks

Strategy Routing

Artifact Type	Primary Strategy	Fallback Strategy
hypothesis, claim	assumption-challenge	adversarial-persona
research-question	alternative-analysis	groupthink-mitigation
idea, approach	systematic-probing	assumption-challenge
experiment-design	systematic-probing	alternative-analysis
gap	adversarial-persona	groupthink-mitigation

Budget Table

Parameter	S (Quick)	M (Standard)	L (Deep)
Attack vectors	5	12	20
Probing rounds	3	6	10
Personas	2	4	6
Assumption checks	5	10	20

Tactics

• structured-attack-campaign — Threat surface enumeration, vector generation, systematic probing, aggregation
• assumption-cascade — Surface assumptions, dependency sort, root attack, cascade trace
• adversarial-roleplay — Construct hostile persona, attack from persona perspective, record paths

Context Management

Each subagent operates in isolated adversarial context. Persona contamination is prevented by spawning separate agents per attack role. Findings are aggregated only after all probing rounds complete. Attack vectors are deduplicated before scoring.

Output

Produces RedTeamReport containing: threat surface map, attack results by vector, assumption cascade analysis, resilience score (0.0-1.0), critical vulnerabilities, and recommended hardening actions.

Available Strategies

Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.

Strategy	When to use
adversarial-persona	Strategy: Role-play attacks from hostile personas — competing lab researcher, hostile reviewer, funding skeptic, domain outsider — each with distinct attack motivations and blind spots.
alternative-analysis	Strategy: What-If Analysis, Alternative Futures, and Four Ways of Seeing — generate competing explanations and scenarios to challenge the dominant narrative.
groupthink-mitigation	Strategy: 10th Man Rule and Liberating Structures — institutionalized dissent to prevent premature consensus and expose suppressed objections.
stress-test-assumption-challenge	Strategy: Military-grade assumption testing — Key Assumptions Check, Devil's Advocacy, Team A/B analysis to expose hidden dependencies and unexamined beliefs.
systematic-probing	Strategy: AI-safety systematic probing — enumerate all threat surfaces, generate attack vectors per surface, execute probes, and aggregate findings across the full attack space.

Available Tactics

Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.

Tactic	When to use
adversarial-roleplay	Tactic: Construct detailed hostile persona, attack artifact from that persona's perspective, record successful attack paths for aggregation.
assumption-cascade	Tactic: Surface assumptions, sort by dependency, attack root assumptions first, then trace cascade failures through the dependency graph.
structured-attack-campaign	Tactic: Full attack lifecycle — threat surface enumeration, attack vector generation, systematic probing, and finding aggregation across all surfaces.

Available SOPs

Optional, no fixed order; the final leaf is always a sop.

SOP	When to use
context-checkpoint	Append research process and results to the current Phase's context file. Covers both process and results with genuine substance. Use this skill at plan-designated checkpoint points — typically after each strategy completes or at key decision nodes within a research Phase.
context-init	Create a new context file for a research Phase. Called once at Phase start to initialize the file that subsequent context-checkpoint calls will append to. Use this skill whenever a new research Phase begins and a fresh context file is needed.
mitigation-proposal	Proposes concrete mitigation strategies for identified weaknesses. Generates prevention, detection, and response measures with feasibility assessment.
stress-test-saturation-detection	Determines whether validation has reached saturation — no new weaknesses or failure modes being discovered. Used by all 5 campaigns as termination signal.
verdict-synthesis	Synthesizes findings from a completed campaign into typed verdict reports. Produces DebateVerdict, RedTeamReport, FailureAnticipationReport, CounterfactualMap, or AdversarialStressReport depending on campaign. Also supports cross-campaign StressTestSummary.
weakness-classification	Classifies discovered weaknesses into severity tiers (fatal/major/minor/cosmetic) with structured justification and exploitability assessment.