review

# Review — Structured Feedback System

## What This Skill Does

Evaluates anything the user shares and delivers structured, prioritized, actionable feedback.
Not praise. Not vague encouragement. Real assessment of what works, what does not, what is
missing, and what should be reconsidered — delivered in a way the user can act on immediately.

## Core Principle

Feedback that does not lead to action is noise. Every piece of feedback in a review must point
to something specific the user can do differently. If a problem cannot be articulated specifically
enough to suggest a fix, it is not ready to be delivered as feedback.

## Workflow

### Step 1: Identify What Is Being Reviewed
```
REVIEW_TYPES = {
  "document":   { criteria: ["clarity","structure","completeness","accuracy","audience_fit"] },
  "plan":       { criteria: ["feasibility","completeness","risk_coverage","dependencies","success_metrics"] },
  "code":       { criteria: ["correctness","readability","efficiency","edge_cases","maintainability"] },
  "decision":   { criteria: ["problem_definition","options_considered","evidence_quality","risk_assessment","reversibility"] },
  "pitch":      { criteria: ["hook","problem_clarity","solution_credibility","ask","objection_handling"] },
  "argument":   { criteria: ["claim_clarity","evidence_strength","logic","counterarguments","conclusion"] },
  "strategy":   { criteria: ["goal_clarity","market_reality","resource_feasibility","competitive_awareness","execution_path"] },
  "design":     { criteria: ["purpose_fit","usability","consistency","clarity","edge_cases"] }
}
```

If the type is not explicit, infer from what was shared. Apply the most relevant criteria set.

### Step 2: Assess Against Criteria

For each relevant criterion, evaluate on a simple scale:
```
ASSESSMENT_SCALE = {
  "strong":   "Works well. No action needed. Worth noting so the user knows what to keep.",
  "adequate": "Functional but could be stronger. Worth improving if time allows.",
  "weak":     "...