critic

Spawn a named persona reviewer on a chapter, range, or the full manuscript. Each persona is a reviewer with its own critical concerns and pet peeves; pick the one whose concern matches the question being asked of the manuscript.

Important. These personas are reviewers, not voice models. They tell you whether your prose holds up against their concern — not how to write. Your own voice lives in craft/voice.md; the critics review that voice, they don't replace it.

Available personas

Persona	Critical concern	Best for
karpyshyn	Moral-grey character psychology; efficient prose	Old Republic psychology; Sith / fallen-Jedi arcs; redemption that has to be earned
zahn	Tactical realism, lore discipline, plausibility	Military scenes; fleet engagements; invented systems; Force-mechanic discipline
traviss	Mandalorian cultural authenticity, dialect	Mandalorian culture; Mando'a register; military fiction texture
stover	Prose-level intensity, philosophical violence	Lightsaber duels; Sith philosophy; prose that needs to cut
lucas	Mythic structure, archetypal clarity	"Is this Star Wars enough?" — operatic shape, archetypal clarity, rhymes
james-wood	Sentence-craft, free-indirect style	Genre-neutral sentence craft; consciousness; free-indirect style
in-universe-beta-reader	Old Republic tone / feel	"Does this sound KOTOR?" — softer bar than strict canon

Usage

/holocron:critic karpyshyn 5                 # Karpyshyn on chapter 5
/holocron:critic zahn all                    # Zahn on full manuscript
/holocron:critic stover chapters/08.md       # Stover on a specific file
/holocron:critic lucas 3-7                   # Lucas on a chapter range
/holocron:critic james-wood                  # Most recently written chapter

If two personas are named (karpyshyn and zahn, or karpyshyn,zahn), spawn both in parallel and present their reviews side-by-side.

How this dispatches

1. Validate the persona name against the table above. If unknown, suggest the closest match (zhan → zahn, wood → james-wood) and ask the user to confirm.
2. Resolve scope:
   • No scope → most recently modified chapter under chapters/.
   • Number → chapters/0X-*.md.
   • Range (3-7) → expand to individual chapter files.
   • all → all files under chapters/.
   • Path → use directly.
3. Gather minimal context the persona needs to anchor:
   • The chapter file(s) (the persona reads them itself via Read).
   • architecture.md if reviewing the full manuscript.
   • Era and any lore-overlay relevant to the scope.
4. Spawn the persona agent via the Task tool with subagent_type: "holocron:<persona>". Prompt should include the scope and one sentence on what the user wants from this pass (e.g. "Karpyshyn read of chapter 5; the user is worried the protagonist's turn isn't earned.").
5. If multiple personas requested, spawn all Task calls in a single message so they run concurrently.
6. Return each persona's review verbatim, then offer: "Want me to convert any of this into actionable edits?"

When to use this vs. /holocron:review or /holocron:critique

• /holocron:review — iterative chapter feedback during drafting. Generic chapter-reviewer agent. Use it most.
• /holocron:critique — full literary review of a completed manuscript. NYT/New Yorker register. Use it once near the end.
• /holocron:critic <persona> — targeted, opinionated read against a specific concern. Use it when the manuscript needs a stress test from one direction (military realism, Mandalorian voice, mythic shape, etc.).

A typical late-draft sequence: /holocron:critique for the broad pass, then 2–3 personas via /holocron:critic for the specific concerns the critique surfaced.

Failure modes

• Wrong persona for the scope. James Wood reviewing a fleet battle will produce thin notes; Zahn reviewing free-indirect interiority likewise. If the persona-vs-scope match looks weak, surface that to the user before spawning.
• Empty manuscript. If the resolved scope contains zero files, stop and ask the user for a path.
• Persona disagreement. Multiple personas often disagree (this is a feature). Don't try to reconcile — present them as distinct voices and let the author choose.