six-sigma-challengelisted

# Six-Sigma Challenge Challenge any quality assessment to find the gap between current outcome and perfection. ## Inputs | Input | Required | Source | |-------|----------|--------| | Review file | Yes | First argument, or `todos/ultra-implement/blind_review.md` | | Target document | Yes | Second argument, or auto-detected (see below) | **Invocation**: `/six-sigma-challenge <review-file> <target-document>` **Default**: `/six-sigma-challenge` (uses ultra-implement defaults) **Auto-detection for target document** (when no second argument): 1. Read `todos/ultra-implement/investigation_report.md` and extract the `Problem File:` path 2. If that file exists, use it as the target document 3. Fallback: `todos/ultra-implement/COMPLETION.md` This ensures the caveats append to the original problem file regardless of what `/ultra-implement` was invoked with. ## Phase 1: Extract Quality Gaps Read the review file. Identify every area where the outcome falls short of perfection. **For scored reviews** (X/10 criteria): Record each criterion below 10/10, the deficit, and the reviewer's reasoning. Rank by deficit size. **For qualitative reviews** (PASS/FAIL, APPROVED with notes): Extract every caveat, concern, minor finding, suggestion, and "PASS with notes" qualification. Each is a gap. **For unstructured assessments**: Identify every hedging phrase ("mostly," "generally," "with the exception of"), every risk noted, every follow-up suggested. Each is a gap. ## Phase 2: Analyze Each