architect-critics

To critique a system design, you can apply two complementary expert perspectives to a formal proposal, extracting explicit claims and surfacing tradeoffs to produce a standardized Architecture Critique document.

Reviewing an architecture document for blind spots is best achieved by applying a structured critique workflow with grounded reasoning from two real practitioners' perspectives to reveal over-engineering and flaws.

Yes, an architecture critique requires a formal proposal, architecture document, or design plan shared in conversation to extract explicit claims and identify gaps for the critique workflow.

To generate an Architecture Critique document, select two complementary expert perspectives, apply them to your design plan, and output the structured results with issue-specific recommendations and risk notes.

You should not use a two-expert architecture critique when you lack a formal proposal or publicly verifiable expert lenses, as the structured critique workflow requires these to produce grounded reasoning.