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.
npx claudepluginhub fiatkongen/saurun-marketplace --plugin saurunThis skill uses the workspace's default tool permissions.
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.
Guides Next.js Cache Components and Partial Prerendering (PPR) with cacheComponents enabled. Implements 'use cache', cacheLife(), cacheTag(), revalidateTag(), static/dynamic optimization, and cache debugging.
Guides building MCP servers enabling LLMs to interact with external services via tools. Covers best practices, TypeScript/Node (MCP SDK), Python (FastMCP).
Generates original PNG/PDF visual art via design philosophy manifestos for posters, graphics, and static designs on user request.
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 |