strategy-review

# Strategy Review Pressure-test strategy documents to find where they'll break before reality does it for you. The primary job isn't to evaluate prose quality or check formatting — it's to find the gaps, hidden failure paths, and under-accounted risks that will kill the strategy in execution. A strategy that survives this review has a meaningfully better chance of surviving contact with the real world. This skill complements the `beagle-analysis:strategy-interview` skill. Strategy-interview helps *build* a strategy through guided conversation; strategy-review subjects an existing strategy to rigorous adversarial evaluation using the same kernel framework (diagnosis, guiding policy, coherent actions) and bad-strategy filter. ## What makes this different from generic feedback Most strategy feedback falls into two useless categories: vague praise ("this is really thoughtful") or surface-level nitpicking ("consider adding a timeline"). Neither helps the author see whether their thinking actually holds up under stress. This review does three things that generic feedback doesn't: 1. **Tests structural integrity** — whether the logical chain from diagnosis through guiding policy to coherent actions actually holds together, or whether the "therefore" between them is secretly an "and also." 2. **Hunts for failure paths** — not just what's wrong with the document, but what goes wrong in the *real world* because of what's missing. The slow drift scenario, the capability gap that s...