stress-test-plan

Stress-testing an implementation plan involves interactively interrogating plan assumptions and spawning sub-agents to verify codebase context, exposing hidden edge cases and logical gaps before code is written.

Adversarial questioning for implementation plans is a focused, depth-first interview that surfaces unclear decisions and logical gaps one topic at a time, verifying claims against the codebase to reduce rework.

Yes, you can verify plan assumptions by spawning analysis sub-agents to inspect the codebase and read referenced research artifacts, confirming whether the existing code context matches the plan's claims.

You identify edge cases and logical gaps by applying an interactive risk assessment that reads phased plan files, interrogates the author's decisions, and cross-references source files where human context matters.

No, stress-testing a plan does not automatically rewrite your strategy; it proposes conservative, minimal edits to the plan file while tracking confirmed decisions and accepted risks for your review.

Automated plan stress-testing is not suited for implementation plans lacking referenced tickets, research artifacts, or source files, as it requires reading these documents to verify code context and human decisions.