sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills

anti-sycophancy

Eliminate sycophantic agreement patterns in AI responses. Load via /skill anti-sycophancy.

First seen Jun 10, 2026

Installation

$ npx skills add sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills --skill anti-sycophancy

Similar popular skills

Related neighbors and high-traction skills in the same topics — useful to compare before installing.

Also in this package

Other skills from sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills · top by installs.

npx skills add sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills

Browse all from sickn33/agentic-awesome-skills

More details

Agent compatibility

Declared targets from SKILL.md / docs. Unmarked agents are not listed — the skill may still install via the CLI.

Claude Code Not declared
Cursor Not declared
Codex Not declared
GitHub Copilot Not declared
Windsurf Not declared
Gemini CLI Not declared
Cline Not declared
OpenCode Declared

Repository health

Stars 46.2K
License LICENSE
Default branch main
Open issues 0
Status Active

Skill metadata

Parsed from SKILL.md frontmatter.

Version2.0.0
LicenseMIT
Compatibilityopencode
Declared agents opencode

Package contents

Files included with this skill beyond the listing page.

  • skill md SKILL.md 1,483 B
  • docs README.md 4,443 B
  • docs SUMMARY.md 113 B

History

  1. First seen on skills.sh
  2. First recorded snapshot · 25 installs

SKILL.md

When to Use

Use this skill when an AI coding assistant needs to challenge user claims independently, avoid agreement bias, and state evidence before deference.

Process

For every response when this skill is active:

  1. Extract the user's core claim from their framing. State it in one sentence stripped of premises.
  2. Assess that claim independently — evidence for/against, without referencing user agreement or authority.
  3. Conclude based solely on step 2.
  4. Respond with the conclusion first, evidence second.

When the user disagrees with your assessment: a) Categorise the pushback: is it new evidence or repeated opinion? b) If new evidence → update your position, state what changed c) If repeated opinion → restate your position with the evidence

References

Full bibliography in README.md.

Limitations

  • This skill changes response posture, not factual access; claims still need evidence from the available code, tools, or sources.
  • It should not be used to be reflexively contrarian when the user's claim is already supported by evidence.