review-plan

To stress-test an architecture plan, perform a multi-phase adversarial review that simulates failure post-mortems, critiques over-engineering, and identifies unstated assumptions. This systematic devil's advocate approach uncovers blind spots and potential failure points before execution begins.

An adversarial plan review systematically attacks a proposed architecture or analysis document to find flaws. It operates by applying specific analytical lenses—such as failure post-mortems, over-engineering critiques, and red team destruction—to classify and address potential risks.

To find unstated assumptions in a project decision document, use a structured plan review that explicitly lists hidden dependencies and their failure implications. Identifying these blind spots early combats confirmation bias and ensures all conditions for validity are met.

Yes, you can use a devil's advocate review for any implementation plan by classifying it into Light, Standard, or Deep tiers. This classification adjusts the review depth, with Deep-tier plans optionally receiving an additional cold review by a subagent for maximum scrutiny.

You need a red team destruction analysis for architecture decisions when preparing for a robust feature launch and wanting to combat confirmation bias. This deep-tier stress test actively simulates failure scenarios to uncover potential pitfalls and ensure plan validity.

The best way to review a new feature plan for potential failure points is conducting an adversarial review. It identifies risks through simulated failure post-mortems and over-engineering critiques, systematically addressing all potential pitfalls to facilitate plan improvement.