Agent Skills
› rustfs/rustfs
› adversarial-validation
adversarial-validation
GitHub针对 RustFS 的高风险变更提供对抗性代码审查，依据风险等级选择正确性、安全等维度探针，执行严格验证流程以发现潜在缺陷。
Trigger Scenarios
用户请求对抗性审查
AGENTS.md 判定为高风险变更
重大 PR 审查
Install
npx skills add rustfs/rustfs --skill adversarial-validation -g -y
SKILL.md
Frontmatter
{
"name": "adversarial-validation",
"description": "Review a final RustFS diff adversarially when the user requests adversarial review, the root AGENTS.md classifies the change as high risk, or a substantial PR is being reviewed. Do not use for ordinary questions, diagnosis, planning, status, documentation-only work, or routine low-risk implementation."
}
RustFS Adversarial Validation
Use the risk tier and review shape defined in the root AGENTS.md. This skill
routes a review to RustFS-specific probes without loading unrelated domains.
Select Lenses
Read only the references required by the diff:
| Lens | When to read |
|---|---|
| Correctness | Every non-exempt adversarial review |
| Simplicity | Mechanical/standard changes and production growth |
| Test coverage | Behavior or test changes |
| Security | Authn/authz, IAM, RPC trust, paths, secrets, parsing, browser, encryption |
| Concurrency/durability | Async shared state, locks, storage commit, cancellation, persisted queues |
| Compatibility | S3 surface, MinIO interop, metadata, wire/disk formats, mixed versions |
| Performance | Request/object hot paths, allocation, blocking work, fsync, fan-out |
Do not read all references as a precaution. A path name alone is insufficient; the changed behavior must touch the lens's domain.
For a dedicated security audit or advisory analysis, use
security-advisory-lessons instead of loading it automatically during every
adversarial review.
Review Protocol
- Freeze the exact final diff/head and list the selected lenses.
- Run the review shape required by root
AGENTS.md. - For each selected lens, either report a concrete finding or a null verdict naming the attacks performed.
- A finding needs
file:line, a triggering input/state/interleaving, the wrong outcome, and a focused fix or missing regression check. - Fix or rebut every finding with code-path, test, or invariant evidence.
- After a non-trivial edit, rerun only lenses affected by that edit against the new exact diff.
Do not turn a null verdict into a long checklist. Record concise evidence that the relevant failure classes were attacked.
Version History
-
0fe41da
Current 2026-08-29 02:10
重构审查流程，从角色剧本改为基于差异触发的透镜选择机制，优化引用加载策略。
- 0d129ec 2026-08-20 14:32
