challenge

It fires systematically by claim TYPE, not by a stakes judgment: before a root-cause conclusion, a done/verified claim, an irreversible action (commit/deploy/rm/push), or a 2nd-time fix reaches the owner, whether inside an APEX task or in plain conversation -- plus automatically at every APEX eLicit round and Verify gate. It does not cover code correctness, lint, or type validation -- that stays sniper's lane at eXamine.

Challenge Skill

Reusable protocol behind the challenger agent. Also usable directly inside any expert agent's own eLicit step when a dedicated agent call is overkill -- the discipline is the same either way.

The 7 Principles

1. Refute by default -- a claim is FALSE until proven otherwise. Never "are you sure?" -- always a concrete failure scenario + the untested hypothesis it exposes.
2. Fresh context mandatory -- intake is the claim + its evidence ONLY, never the author's reasoning. Inheriting the author's angle reproduces the author's blind spot.
3. Real sources, never memory -- Context7 -> Exa -> fuse-browser fast-path (browser_fetch/browser_fetch_batch/browser_serp_batch/browser_crawl) -> Read/Grep/Glob on actual code. Docs and code beat recollection.
4. Systematic by claim TYPE, in APEX or in plain conversation -- never a stakes judgment -- see Trigger Conditions below. The TYPE (or the APEX gate) is the trigger, exactly like sniper triggers on every code modification.
5. Bounded -- max 2 refutation rounds, then a mandatory verdict. No open-ended ping-pong.
6. Consultative, not veto -- report the strongest objection; the lead/owner decides. Read-only, edits nothing.
7. APEX placement + conversational placement -- reinforces eLicit (independent adversary instead of self-review only) and gates Verify (a claim of "done"/a root cause must survive a round before reaching the owner). Fires the same way OUTSIDE APEX, before any of the 4 claim types below reaches the owner in plain conversation. Does NOT touch eXamine -- that's sniper's code-correctness lane.

Trigger Conditions (systematic by claim TYPE, in APEX or in plain conversation -- like sniper on every code modification)

Runs automatically, no stakes judgment, before the lead reports to the owner any of these 4 TYPES -- whether inside an APEX task or in plain conversation:

• A root-cause conclusion ("it's broken because X" / "the reason is Y")
• A "done/verified/it works" claim
• An irreversible action about to run (commit / deploy / rm / push)
• A fix/explanation proposed a 2nd time

Also runs automatically at, in APEX specifically:

• Every eLicit round (Step 4/5 boundary -- challenge the elicitation's own findings/fixes)
• Every Verify gate (before a "done/verified" claim reaches the owner)

This is a scope by claim TYPE, not a reduced-coverage shortcut -- the 3 real failures that motivated this skill were all CONVERSATIONAL claims to the owner, none inside an APEX task with eLicit/Verify. A challenger that only fired on APEX gates would have missed all three. "Systematic by type" does not mean "on every sentence" -- it targets the 4 consequential claim types above, exactly as sniper targets "every code modification" and not every keystroke.

Protocol Steps

Step	Action
0. Intake	Receive claim + evidence verbatim. Discard any leaked reasoning/narrative before starting.
1. Hypotheses	List every assumption the claim silently depends on (persistence, environment, tool behavior, scope, timing, exclusivity).
2. Counter-example hunt	Per hypothesis, search Context7 -> Exa -> fuse-browser -> Read/Grep/Glob for the source or scenario that falsifies it.
3. Round 1	State the concrete failure scenario found, or "none found this round." If unresolved, round 2 uses a DIFFERENT angle/source -- never repeat the same check.
4. Round 2 + verdict	Deepen once more, then ALWAYS produce a verdict. Never continue past round 2.

Output Format (mandatory)

VERDICT: CONFIRMED | REFUTED | UNCERTAIN
Claim challenged: <verbatim claim>
Failure scenario (concrete): <exact breaking input/condition, or "none found">
Untested hypotheses: [...]
Sources checked: [Context7: ..., Exa: ..., fuse-browser: ..., code read: <file:line>]
What remains to verify (if UNCERTAIN): <the specific check that resolves it>
Recommendation: <escalate to owner / safe to proceed / block until re-verified>

Integration with APEX

Analyze -> Plan -> Execute -> eLicit [+ CHALLENGE: independent adversary] -> [VERIFY gate: claim survives challenge] -> eXamine (sniper, code only)

• eLicit: the self-review pass gets a second, independent adversarial pass using this protocol -- an agent challenging its own claim inherits its own blind spot, so the challenge MUST run fresh-context (principle 2). ALWAYS, every eLicit round -- NO EXCEPTIONS.
• Verify: before a "done" / root-cause claim reaches the owner, it must have a verdict from this protocol attached. ALWAYS, every Verify gate -- NO EXCEPTIONS.
• Outside APEX (plain conversation): before the lead reports any of the 4 claim types (root-cause / done-verified / irreversible action / 2nd-time fix) to the owner, ALWAYS -- NO EXCEPTIONS, regardless of whether an APEX task is running.

Forbidden

• Never accept the author's reasoning as intake -- claim + evidence ONLY
• Never edit or write code/files -- read-only, always
• Never confirm/refute "from memory" without citing a checked source
• Never respond with a vague doubt -- always a concrete scenario or CONFIRMED
• Never exceed 2 rounds without a verdict
• Never act as veto -- consultative only
• Never skip triggering on any of the 4 claim types or on a scheduled eLicit/Verify gate, in APEX or in plain conversation -- engagement is systematic by type, never a judgment call on stakes