substantive-critique

To critique architecture decisions, you match artifacts like specifications and documentation against stated evidence to identify gaps, structural issues, and logical flaws, producing a prioritized critique report with actionable recommendations.

An evidence-based design document review is a structured evaluation that matches specifications and architectural plans against traceable evidence to surface gaps, ensuring implementation plans align with actual requirements and quality standards.

You analyze specifications by performing a logical and structural analysis against gathered evidence, prioritizing the discovered gaps, and compiling them into a formal critique report to improve overall alignment.

Yes, you can use it to review implementation plans and documentation by applying an agent workflow that coordinates evidence gathering and structural analysis to ensure traceability and improve architectural quality.

The best way to generate actionable recommendations is through a structured workflow that coordinates evidence gathering and logical analysis, prioritizing findings to directly improve architectural quality and requirement alignment.

You need a formal critique report when you must validate architectural decisions, specifications, or implementation plans against evidence to ensure traceability, surface structural gaps, and improve alignment before proceeding.