From product-eval
Adversarial review of a plan, roadmap, or PRD to find what's wrong before committing. Returns blocking issues, suggestions, and a ready/needs-fixes/not-ready verdict.
How this skill is triggered — by the user, by Claude, or both
Slash command
/product-eval:pressure-testThe summary Claude sees in its skill listing — used to decide when to auto-load this skill
Adversarial review of an **existing** plan, roadmap, PRD, bet, or strategy, find what's wrong before the user commits. This is `critique` pointed at a whole artifact: it runs the same independent adversarial engine, so there is one critic, not two.
Adversarial review of an existing plan, roadmap, PRD, bet, or strategy, find what's wrong before the user commits. This is critique pointed at a whole artifact: it runs the same independent adversarial engine, so there is one critic, not two.
.product-eval/<scope>/.critique on it: the multi-lens panel (skeptical customer, competitor, CFO, engineer, contrarian, security) plus the critic-checklist.md checks (evidence→solution, solution→ship, cross-stage consistency) and a scope-mode recommendation (Expand / Hold / Reduce). Run it independently (a fresh-context subagent; a different model if available) so it does not rubber-stamp.gather-evidence) / contested (→ logged dissent), never argue to consensus.Blocking issues (with fixes), suggestions, strengths, a scope-mode call, and an overall ready / needs fixes / not ready verdict. Append the findings to .product-eval/<scope>/decisions-log.md. Lead with the verdict and the blocking issues. End with Next move: and recommend fixing the blockers, writing the decision memo, making the build brief, or using critique if the artifact is only a finding/problem statement rather than a full plan.
npx claudepluginhub sparkline-ventures/product-evalStress-tests plans using red-team/blue-team adversarial review: red team generates grounded what-if questions on gaps and assumptions; blue team delivers verdicts. Ideal before implementation or stakeholder review.
Scrutinizes ideas or plans adversarially: spawns skeptics across lenses like technical, economic, operational; advocate defends; synthesizes feedback report. No code or artifacts.
Pressure tests plans, strategies, and communications to uncover high-leverage gaps before stakeholders do. Domain-smart advisor with actionable feedback.