review

To conduct a multi-pass technical review of SA deliverables, use a structured framework that executes discovery, refinement, and polish passes to surface gaps and propose remediation without rewriting content.

Dual-perspective validation in architecture quality reviews applies both Builder and Tester viewpoints to balance practical implementation with rigorous testing, ensuring technical soundness and feasibility before client delivery.

Yes, you can run a quick quality assessment on a knowledge base file by selecting the QUICK depth mode, which generates a structured quality assessment and improvement plan faster than standard or comprehensive modes.

Yes, the SA deliverable review process supports optional WA pillar-ready checks specifically for evaluating architecture artifacts to ensure proper alignment with foundational architecture pillars.

The best way to surface gaps in solution architecture outputs before client delivery is running a three-iteration evaluation workflow that assesses completeness, technical soundness, architecture alignment, clarity, and feasibility.

You should not use an automated review Skill for SA deliverables when your goal is to rewrite or generate new content, as the framework is designed strictly to surface findings and propose remediation rather than authoring deliverables.