First-class "adversarial-verify + live-source check" review mode for multi-agent workflows

Type: enhancement · Area: multi-agent workflows / verification patterns

Motivation

A repeatedly high-value workflow shape is: produce, then adversarially verify against the source of truth. Concretely, in a codebase audit:

1. A "mapper" agent extracts claims (invariants, risks, behaviors) from code + history + docs.
2. A separate "verifier" agent is instructed to refute each claim by opening the actual files.
3. Claims that survive are confirmed; claims marked needs-live-db are settled by read-only queries against the running system.

In real runs this caught defects the mapper asserted confidently, and corrected the verifier itself — a claim derived from static source (a migration file) was wrong about the live system, and only the read-only production check surfaced the truth. Neither single agent, and no static-only pass, would have caught it.

Proposed feature

A documented, first-class pattern / helper for "generate → adversarial-verify → live-source settle," including:

• a verifier role prompt template that defaults to skepticism (refute-by-default, cite file:line),
• a structured verdict schema (confirmed / refuted / partly-true / needs-live-db),
• guidance/guardrails for a read-only live-source settle step (e.g. enforced read-only transactions) so verification against a running system is safe by construction.

Why it helps everyone

"One agent confidently produces a plausible-but-wrong artifact" is the central failure mode of LLM automation. Making adversarial verification a supported, low-friction mode — rather than something each author hand-rolls — raises the floor on trustworthiness for audits, reviews, migrations, and research.

Filed from real multi-agent workflow usage.