Red-team a PRD, roadmap, or strategy by attacking its load-bearing assumptions before reality does. Steelmans then attacks each claim, ranks failure modes by impact × likelihood × cheapness-to-test, and returns the cheapest test and kill criteria for each. Use when stress-testing a plan, pressure-testing a strategy, challenging assumptions, or preparing a doc for executive review.
Works with
AI-first code editor with Composer
Before installing skills in Cursor, ensure your development environment meets these requirements:
node --versionstrategy-red-teamExecute the skills CLI command in your project's root directory to begin installation:
Fetches strategy-red-team from phuryn/pm-skills and configures it for Cursor.
The CLI shows a list of agents. Use arrow keys and space to select Cursor:
Confirm successful installation by checking the skill directory location:
Restart Cursor to activate strategy-red-team. Access via /strategy-red-team in your agent's command palette.
We perform automated surface-level scans (Gen AI Scanner, Socket, Snyk) during installation. These checks detect common vulnerabilities but do not guarantee complete security. Always review skill source code and verify the publisher's reputation before production use.
Skills execute code in your environment. Always review source, verify the publisher, and test in isolation before production.
Submit your Claude Code skill and start earning
Automate repetitive workflows and reduce manual effort
Example
Generate reports, summarize documents, draft communications
Save 3-5 hours per week on routine tasks
Learn new skills, understand complex topics, get expert guidance
Example
Explain concepts, provide examples, suggest learning resources
Accelerate learning and skill development by 2x
Enhance output quality through reviews, suggestions, and refinements
Example
Review drafts, suggest improvements, catch errors
Improve work quality by 30-40% with less effort
0
total installs
0
this week
15.4K
GitHub stars
0
upvotes
Run in your terminal
0
installs
0
this week
15.4K
stars
| name | strategy-red-team |
| description | "Red-team a PRD, roadmap, or strategy by attacking its load-bearing assumptions before reality does. Steelmans then attacks each claim, ranks failure modes by impact × likelihood × cheapness-to-test, and returns the cheapest test and kill criteria for each. Use when stress-testing a plan, pressure-testing a strategy, challenging assumptions, or preparing a doc for executive review." |
You are a sharp, fair adversary reviewing $ARGUMENTS. Most plans only survived polite feedback. This skill finds the load-bearing assumptions that would make the plan fail, attacks them honestly, and returns — for each — the evidence to get this week, the kill criteria, and the cheapest test.
A red-team is not a pre-mortem. A pre-mortem imagines the plan already failed and narrates why. A red-team attacks the load-bearing assumptions and logic now, while there's still time to test the cheapest one. It improves judgment, not just confidence.
The goal is a sharper decision, not a longer risk list. Five real kill-assumptions with tests beat twenty generic risks.
Extract every claim. Read the plan and list what it asserts as true — about the user, the market, the constraint, the mechanism, the timeline. Separate load-bearing claims (if false, the plan dies) from cosmetic ones. Only load-bearing claims are worth attacking.
Steelman, then attack. For each load-bearing claim, first state the strongest version of why it might be true. Then attack that — not a strawman. An attack on a weak version of the claim is worthless.
Write each failure mode as "Fails if ___." Be concrete and falsifiable. "Fails if activation isn't actually the constraint" beats "execution risk."
Rank by (impact if wrong) × (likelihood wrong) × (cheapness to test). The top of the list is what to test this week — high-impact, plausibly wrong, and cheap to check. Surface that ranking; don't bury the lede.
Self-refute, don't fabricate. Default to "this risk is real" unless the plan already cites evidence against it. But if a claim is genuinely well-reasoned, say so plainly — a red-team that manufactures doubt is as useless as one that rubber-stamps. Never invent a weakness the plan doesn't have.
For each surviving kill-assumption, give the operator something to do:
Optional cross-model mode. If the user asks for a second opinion and another model (Codex, Gemini, a second Claude) is reachable, run the same plan through it and flag where the two disagree — different model families miss different things. Default is single-model; don't add this friction unless asked.
Structure the output (make it screenshot-native):
## Red-Team: [plan in one line]
### Top Kill-Assumptions (ranked)
For each (3–5 max):
- **Claim:** [the load-bearing assertion]
- **Fails if:** [concrete, falsifiable condition]
- **Evidence to get this week:** [specific]
- **Kill criterion:** [threshold]
- **Cheapest test:** [smallest experiment]
### What's Well-Reasoned
[State explicitly what holds up — and why. Don't manufacture doubt.]
### What I Couldn't Assess
[Gaps where the plan didn't give enough to judge.]
Prerequisites
Time Estimate
15-45 minutes depending on use case complexity
Steps
Common Pitfalls
✓ Do
✗ Don't
💡 Pro Tips
✓ Use when
Use when skill capabilities match your task, clear ROI on time saved, and you can validate outputs. Best for repetitive tasks, learning, and quality improvement.
✗ Avoid when
Avoid when task requires deep expertise you can't validate, involves sensitive decisions, or when learning process is more valuable than speed of completion.
phuryn/pm-skills
phuryn/pm-skills
phuryn/pm-skills
phuryn/pm-skills
phuryn/pm-skills
phuryn/pm-skills
We added strategy-red-team from the explainx registry; install was straightforward and the SKILL.md answered most questions upfront.
strategy-red-team is among the better-maintained entries we tried; worth keeping pinned for repeat workflows.
Useful defaults in strategy-red-team — fewer surprises than typical one-off scripts, and it plays nicely with `npx skills` flows.
Solid pick for teams standardizing on skills: strategy-red-team is focused, and the summary matches what you get after install.
I recommend strategy-red-team for anyone iterating fast on agent tooling; clear intent and a small, reviewable surface area.
Registry listing for strategy-red-team matched our evaluation — installs cleanly and behaves as described in the markdown.
strategy-red-team fits our agent workflows well — practical, well scoped, and easy to wire into existing repos.
strategy-red-team reduced setup friction for our internal harness; good balance of opinion and flexibility.
Keeps context tight: strategy-red-team is the kind of skill you can hand to a new teammate without a long onboarding doc.
strategy-red-team has been reliable in day-to-day use. Documentation quality is above average for community skills.
showing 1-10 of 38