decision-challenge
From the author
Use when a high-impact plan, migration or architecture claim needs a bounded adversarial challenge before commitment. Isolates claims from persuasion, attacks assumptions, reconciles doubts with evidence and emits proceed/hold/stop. NOT a finished-diff review (`review`/`code-review`), NOT SDD artifact consistency (`analyze`).
Install
npx skills add ericrisco/rsc-harness --skill decision-challenge -a claude-code
Installs to .claude/skills/decision-challenge/ · Each command fetches the skill straight from GitHub with the open skills CLI.
Byte-identical to the scanned commit, with the repository’s licence and a SOURCE.txt.
Want your agent to suggest skills while you type? See how to use skills from your IDE.
Safety checks on SKILL.md
No warnings.
Why 85
aiqbench computes the trust score from public signals. It is not a security audit, so read a skill before you install it.
Similar skills
Closest to this one by what they do and when they are used.
- doubt-driven-developmentaddyosmani/agent-skillsSubjects every non-trivial decision to a fresh-context adversarial review before it stands. Use when you want every assumption cross-examined before proceeding, when stress-testing a plan for hidden failure modes, when correctness matters more than speed, when working in unfamiliar code, when stakes are high (production auth, security-sensitive logic, a high-stakes migration, irreversible operations), or any time a confident output would be cheaper to verify now than to debug later.Security★ 110.3K
- challengingoaustegard/claude-skillsCross-context adversarial review for deliverables before shipping. Use when producing blog posts, technical recommendations, analysis briefs, code, or any artifact where accuracy matters more than speed. Triggers on "challenge this", "review before shipping", "adversarial pass", "stress test this".Testing★ 154
- clarifyericrisco/rsc-harnessUse when a spec exists and must be de-risked before planning — hunt its ambiguities, unstated assumptions and edge cases, ask the few build-changing questions, bake the answers back into the spec. The rsc SDD gate between `specify` (writes the spec) and `plan` (designs the build). NOT the cross-artifact consistency check (that is `analyze`).Writing★ 272
- specifyericrisco/rsc-harnessUse when a feature, change, or product idea is still fuzzy and must become an approved WHAT/WHY spec before any planning or code — the brainstorming front door of SDD. Turns a one-line intent into problem, goals, users, scope, behaviour and acceptance criteria, via frontier-round dialogue and 2-3 approaches with a recommendation, carrying zero implementation detail. Fires whenever someone jumps to HOW before WHAT is agreed, in any language. NOT the technical plan (that is `plan`), NOT the de-risking ambiguity sweep (that is `clarify`), NOT project-wide principles (that is `constitution`).Planning★ 272
- solution-architecturecbrock84/headcountDesigns system structure and makes architectural decisions defensible — boundaries, coupling, trade-offs, and recording why. Use this to design a new system or major component, choose between architectural options, review an existing design, decide where a boundary belongs, or document an architectural decision so it survives the people who made it.Planning★ 2.1K
- tasksericrisco/rsc-harnessUse when an approved plan needs slicing into an ordered task list before any code — the SDD `tasks` phase. Each row carries a literal done-check, dependencies, a parallel-safe marker and a spec trace, appended to the plan artifact. NOT writing the plan (that is `plan`), NOT the consistency gate (that is `analyze`), NOT executing the tasks (that is `implement`).Productivity★ 272
Ratings & reviews
—
no reviews
Tried this skill? Rate it to help others. Sign in
Discussion
Join the discussion. Sign in