| name | red-team |
| description | Adopt a red-team / devil's-advocate stance against the leading option — steel-man the case against, surface hidden assumptions, identify disconfirming evidence. Produces a 0-100 score. |
Red Team / Devil's Advocate
Single-framework analysis. Use when the user wants this lens specifically, or when called as a building block by /decision:analyze.
Inputs
- A decision file path (markdown). If the user describes a decision verbally instead, run
/decision:new-decision first.
Procedure
-
Locate the framework guide at the plugin install dir's frameworks/red-team.md. Read it fully.
-
Read the decision file fully.
-
Apply the framework exactly as the guide specifies. Don't invent additional structure. Don't merge in other frameworks — that's the orchestrator's job.
-
Output destination:
- If the user invoked this standalone, write the analysis inline as the response (and offer to save it to a path).
- If invoked as a subagent by
/decision:analyze, write to the fragment path the orchestrator provides (fragments/red-team.md).
-
End with the score line ## Score: <0-100> per the guide's scoring rubric.
Notes
- Stay inside the framework. If you notice that a different framework would have surfaced something this one missed, note it briefly at the end (
## Cross-framework note) but don't switch lenses.
