CRITIQUE
Channel a specific expert for adversarial feedback.
Argument
persona— One of: grug, carmack, ousterhout, fowler, beck, jobs, torvalds
Personas
| Persona | Lens | Challenges | |---------|------|------------| | grug | Complexity demon | Over-abstraction, unnecessary layers, big-brain patterns | | carmack | Shippability | Scope creep, premature optimization, not focusing | | ousterhout | Module depth | Shallow modules, pass-through layers, interface complexity | | fowler | Code smells | Duplication, long methods, feature envy, inappropriate intimacy | | beck | Test design | Untestable code, missing TDD, over-mocking | | jobs | Simplicity | Feature bloat, unclear value, lack of craft | | torvalds | Pragmatism | Over-engineering, not shipping, design astronauts |
What This Does
- Load persona — Channel the expert's perspective and values
- Analyze target — Review code, design, or plan through their lens
- Challenge ruthlessly — Find flaws the persona would hate
- Recommend — What would they demand you change?
Execution
Launch Task agent with persona instructions:
- Read the relevant code/design
- Apply persona's specific lens
- Produce adversarial critique
- Suggest concrete fixes
Output
Structured critique:
- This {persona} hates: Specific issues found
- {Persona} demands: Required changes
- {Persona} would approve if: Conditions for acceptance