From saurun
Use when user wants brutally honest feedback on business ideas, plans, pitches, or strategies. Triggers on "brutal feedback", "honest review", "devil's advocate", "red team", "tear apart", "critique", "what's wrong with this", "find holes in", "challenge this idea", or requests for harsh/critical evaluation.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/saurun:brutal-reviewThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
Parallel critical analysis using three distinct critic personas at escalating intensity, followed by synthesis with meta-analysis. Each persona uses a different analytical framework to ensure comprehensive coverage.
Parallel critical analysis using three distinct critic personas at escalating intensity, followed by synthesis with meta-analysis. Each persona uses a different analytical framework to ensure comprehensive coverage.
| Code | Persona | Intensity | Framework |
|---|---|---|---|
da | Devil's Advocate | Mild | Assumption Autopsy + Bias Scan + Inversion + Steelman |
rt | Red Team | Medium | Attack Surface Mapping + Threat Sweep + Adversary Sims + Pre-Mortem |
gr | Gordon Ramsay | Intense | Plate Inspection Scores + Bollocking Triplets + Non-Negotiable Fixes |
| (none) | All three | Full | Parallel dispatch + synthesis + meta-analysis |
$ARGUMENTS may optionally start with a persona code (da, rt, or gr). Parse the first token:
Examples:
/brutal-review da My SaaS idea... — Devil's Advocate only/brutal-review rt My SaaS idea... — Red Team only/brutal-review gr My SaaS idea... — Gordon Ramsay only/brutal-review My SaaS idea... — All three + synthesis$ARGUMENTS
↓
Parse persona selector
↓
Detect language (default: Danish)
↓
┌── Single agent? ──┐
│ yes │ no
▼ ▼
Run selected ┌───┼───┐
agent only ▼ ▼ ▼
│ DA RT GR
▼ └───┼───┘
Deliver ↓
directly Synthesize + Meta
↓
Deliver report
Read full agent prompts from references/prompts.md. Before dispatching, replace $ARGUMENTS with the idea text and append a language instruction line: Respond entirely in [detected language].
All three (default): Spawn three Task calls in a single message (parallel). Results return together before your next turn.
Single agent: One Task call for the selected persona. No synthesis needed.
Settings for each Task call:
subagent_type: "general-purpose"model: "sonnet"When all three return, synthesize into this structure. Adapt headings to user's language:
# BRUTAL Review: [Idea title]
## Overall Verdict
[2-3 sentences integrating all three perspectives]
## The Three Critics
### Devil's Advocate (Mild)
[Verdict + top 3 sleep-on-it questions + steelman alternative]
### Red Team (Medium)
[Pre-mortem + kill shot ranking + top adversary simulation]
### Gordon Ramsay (Intense)
[First bite + plate scores + top 3 non-negotiable fixes]
## Common Themes
[What did ALL three flag? Intersection = highest-confidence signal]
## Disagreements
[Where did they diverge? What does the divergence tell us?]
## Meta-Analysis
YOUR OWN assessment:
- Was anything exaggerated or theatrical?
- What blind spots do the critics share?
- Real risk vs. theoretical concern?
- What did the DA's "one thing stronger than they think" reveal?
## Next Steps
[Top 3 actions, synthesized from all critics, ordered by impact]
Continue with available critiques. Note which perspective is missing and how it limits the analysis.
| Mistake | Fix |
|---|---|
| Sequential dispatch | ALL 3 Task calls in a single message |
| Forgetting meta-analysis | ALWAYS add your own assessment — you are the senior partner |
| Copy-pasting sub-agent output | Synthesize: find patterns, contradictions, consensus |
| Skipping common themes | The overlap between critics is the highest-confidence signal |
| Same intensity across all 3 | DA=constructive doubt, RT=adversarial attack, GR=standards fury |
npx claudepluginhub fiatkongen/saurun-marketplace --plugin saurunCritiques ideas, plans, and projects by assuming failure and proving it across eight angles (premises, market, competition, viability, numbers, execution, pre-mortem, blind spot). Useful for brutally honest second opinions, red-teaming, or pre-mortems before committing resources.
Scrutinizes ideas or plans adversarially: spawns skeptics across lenses like technical, economic, operational; advocate defends; synthesizes feedback report. No code or artifacts.
Constructively critiques ideas and proposals by challenging assumptions, finding edge cases and risks, anticipating objections, and suggesting mitigations to strengthen arguments.