'Trigger: judgment day, dual review, adversarial review, juzgar. Run
Scanned 9/10/2026
Install to Claude Code
npx -y skills add JantonioFC/skillsbank --skill judgment-day --agent claude-codeInstalls into .claude/skills of the current project.
Are you the author of Judgment Day?
Add the live security badge to your README — it updates automatically with every re-scan.
[](https://www.skillsdirectory.com/skills/jantoniofc-judgment-day)More formats (shields.io, HTML) on the badges page.
---
name: judgment-day
description: 'Trigger: judgment day, dual review, adversarial review, juzgar. Run
blind dual review, fix confirmed issues, then re-judge.'
license: Apache-2.0
metadata:
author: gentleman-programming
version: '1.4'
---
## Activation Contract
Load this skill only when the user explicitly asks for Judgment Day, dual/adversarial review, or equivalent Spanish trigger (`juzgar`, `que lo juzguen`). Review a specific target: files, feature, PR, or architecture slice.
## Hard Rules
- Resolve project skills before launching agents: read skill registry, match skill paths by target files/task, and inject the same `Skills to load before work` block into both judge prompts and fix prompts.
- Launch **two blind judges in parallel** with identical target and criteria; never review the code yourself.
- Wait for both judges before synthesis; never accept a partial verdict.
- Classify warnings as `WARNING (real)` only if normal intended use can trigger them; otherwise downgrade to INFO as `WARNING (theoretical)`.
- Ask before fixing Round 1 confirmed issues.
- After any fix agent runs, immediately re-launch both judges in parallel before commit/push/done/session summary.
- Terminal states are only `JUDGMENT: APPROVED` or `JUDGMENT: ESCALATED`.
- After 2 fix iterations with remaining issues, ask the user whether to continue.
## Decision Gates
| Condition | Action |
|---|---|
| Target unclear | Ask for scope; do not launch judges. |
| No skill registry | Warn, proceed with generic criteria, and record `Skill Resolution: none`. |
| Both judges find same CRITICAL/real WARNING | Confirmed; ask/fix according to round rules. |
| One judge finds issue | Suspect; report and triage, do not auto-fix. |
| Judges contradict | Escalate for manual decision. |
| Round 2+ has only theoretical warnings/suggestions | Report as INFO; do not re-judge. |
## Execution Steps
1. Confirm target and optional custom criteria.
2. Resolve exact skill paths from registry or warn if missing.
3. Start Judge A and Judge B concurrently via delegation.
4. Synthesize findings into confirmed, suspect, contradiction, and INFO buckets.
5. Ask before Round 1 fixes; delegate a separate fix agent for confirmed approved fixes only.
6. Re-judge in parallel after fixes; repeat until approved, escalated, or user asks to stop.
7. Before any terminal action, verify every active Judgment Day has a terminal state.
## Output Contract
Return `## Judgment Day — {target}` with round number, verdict table, confirmed/suspect/contradiction counts, fixes applied, re-judgment result, `Skill Resolution`, and final `JUDGMENT: APPROVED ✅` or `JUDGMENT: ESCALATED ⚠️`.
## References
- [references/prompts-and-formats.md](references/prompts-and-formats.md) — judge/fix prompts, warning rubric, verdict tables, and language snippets.
Is this your skill, or is something wrong with this listing? Request removal or report an issue. Author removals are honored within 72 hours.
No comments yet. Be the first to comment!