bmad-review-adversarial-general

Adversarial content review is a skeptical critique process that rigorously analyzes specifications, diffs, and docs to surface gaps, inconsistencies, and risks. It identifies at least ten issues and presents them in a structured Markdown findings report to reduce blind spots.

To conduct a cynical review, provide the design document or specification content directly. The review will rigorously critique the input to surface issues beyond surface-level flaws, yielding a prioritized findings report with actionable recommendations in Markdown format.

Yes, you can use this adversarial review on code diffs, user stories, specifications, and other documentation artifacts. It applies a skeptical critique across various content types to identify at least ten issues and produce a structured findings report.

The best way to get structured findings is to submit your content for a disciplined adversarial review. This process yields a concise, prioritized Markdown list of at least ten identified issues with actionable recommendations for improving quality and compliance.

The content review output identifies at least ten issues per submission, ensuring a thorough adversarial analysis. It presents these findings in a clear, structured Markdown list with actionable recommendations, regardless of input size.

You should not use an adversarial approach when you need a quick, surface-level approval rather than a deep, skeptical critique. This method is designed to rigorously identify at least ten issues, which may be excessive for straightforward content checks.