critique

# Critique: Document Pressure Testing Systematically challenge any document for logic, assumptions, completeness, and blind spots. The goal is to make the document stronger, not to tear it down. ## When to Activate - User says "critique this", "pressure test", "poke holes in this" - User says "what am I missing?", "devil's advocate" - User asks for review of a PRD, brief, strategy doc, or proposal - Proactively after `prd` skill produces a Full PRD or RFC ## Input Accept any document: PRD, brief, RFC, strategy doc, proposal, pitch, research synthesis, OKRs. Accept via paste, file path, or workspace reference. ## Process ### Step 1: Understand Intent Before critiquing, identify: 1. **Document type**: PRD, RFC, strategy, proposal, etc. 2. **Audience**: Who will read this? (engineers, execs, stakeholders, investors) 3. **Stage**: Early exploration or ready to ship? 4. **Stakes**: Low-risk experiment or bet-the-company decision? Calibrate critique intensity to stage and stakes. An early one-pager gets lighter scrutiny than a Full PRD about to be shipped. ### Step 2: Evaluate Across 6 Dimensions | Dimension | What to Check | |-----------|--------------| | **Logic** | Does the argument flow? Are conclusions supported by premises? Any circular reasoning? | | **Assumptions** | What is taken for granted? Which assumptions are validated vs hoped? | | **Evidence** | Are claims backed by data, research, or citations? Any `[Assumption]` tags unresolved? | | **Completeness** | ...