bmad-review-adversarial-general

Adversarial review of technical docs applies skeptical critique to surface gaps. You provide a diff, spec, story, or document, and the tool outputs a Markdown findings report enumerating at least ten actionable issues.

The best way to critique an artifact is structured adversarial analysis. It enforces a minimum of ten findings to ensure rigorous quality assessment and risk identification before the content goes live.

Yes, adversarial content analysis works on code diffs, user stories, specs, and general artifacts. It methodically evaluates the provided content to identify risks and gaps across various document types.

To get a structured findings report, provide the artifact requiring critique. The adversarial review generates a Markdown report that lists a minimum of ten identified issues for your risk assessment.

A cynical review approach enforces a high issue threshold, always generating at least ten findings. This constraint may surface minor nitpicks alongside critical gaps, requiring manual triage of the Markdown report.