/critique - Multi-Perspective Critique

Comprehensive multi-perspective review using specialized judges with debate and consensus building

• Purpose - Multi-perspective comprehensive review
• Output - Structured feedback from multiple judges

/critique ["scope or focus area"]

Arguments

Optional file paths, commits, or context to review (defaults to recent changes)

How It Works

1. Context Gathering: Identifies scope of work to review
2. Parallel Review: Spawns three specialized judge agents
   • Requirements Validator: Checks alignment with original requirements
   • Solution Architect: Evaluates technical approach and design
   • Code Quality Reviewer: Assesses implementation quality
3. Cross-Review & Debate: Judges review each other's findings and debate disagreements
4. Consensus Report: Generates comprehensive report with actionable recommendations

Judge Scoring

Each judge provides a score out of 10:

• 9-10: Exceptional quality, minimal improvements needed
• 7-8: Good quality, minor improvements suggested
• 5-6: Acceptable quality, several improvements recommended
• 3-4: Below standards, significant rework needed
• 1-2: Major issues, substantial rework required

Usage Examples

# Review recent work from conversation
> /critique

# Review specific files
> /critique src/auth/*.ts

# Review with security focus
> /critique --focus=security

# Review a git commit range
> /critique HEAD~3..HEAD

Best practices

• For important decisions - Use critique for architectural or design choices
• Before major commits - Get multi-perspective review before committing
• Learn from debates - Pay attention to different perspectives in the critique
• Address all concerns - Don't cherry-pick feedback