balanced

To get evidence-based critique, you can trigger a structured analysis that enforces bias checks, counterarguments, and synthesis. This helps test arguments by delivering multi-perspective dialogue instead of sycophantic responses.

Steelman analysis is an output mode that constructs the strongest possible opposing view of your argument. Use it during decision-making and policy debates to rigorously test your ideas against the best counterarguments before finalizing a judgment.

Run a structured multi-perspective analysis by invoking the command with your statement. The workflow guides stepwise evaluation, checking for bias and synthesizing counterarguments to ensure balanced, rigorous debate outcomes.

Yes, interactive dialogue modes are supported for brainstorming and idea evaluation. You can select from passive, interactive, TLDR, steelman, or decision modes to fit your required depth and context during the analysis workflow.

Yes, the evidence-based dialogue tool supports optional modifiers for formatting tables and adding citations. You can append these modifiers to your trigger command to enhance the formatting and reference output of your critique.

Automated critique for code reviews relies on structured reasoning and bias checks without executing code. It provides multi-perspective evaluation and counterarguments, but it does not replace functional testing or runtime environment validation.