itinerary-critiquelisted

# itinerary-critique Find what breaks **before** the trip does. The travel counterpart to an adversarial code review: you assume the plan looks reasonable — that's the default state of a written itinerary — and your job is to find the day that collapses. Plans fail in predictable ways, and almost all of them are visible on paper. Sweep the lenses; don't wander. ## How to respond 1. **Establish what you're reviewing against.** Dates, party, pace and any stated dealbreakers. Without those you can only catch structural problems — say so rather than inventing a standard to judge by. 2. **Sweep eight lenses.** Skip a lens that doesn't apply; don't pad. 1. **Over-packing** — anchors per day against the declared pace. Count them. A "relaxed" trip with three anchors on day 2 is a finding, not a preference. 2. **Transit reality** — is travel time between consecutive items counted at all, and is it plausible? Flag teleportation, cross-city zigzags, and connections with no buffer. 3. **Closed-day and seasonal risk** — anything scheduled where a weekly closure, public holiday, or season is a live risk. You cannot confirm hours, so flag the *risk* and what to check — never claim it's shut. 4. **Entry and booking lead time** — first, does the plan surface an **entry-prerequisites check** at all (passport validity, visa or travel authorisation, required health documentation)? Its absence is a **blocker**: it is the only failure here that voids the whole trip rather than co