elsa-critical-constitution-review

name	elsa-critical-constitution-review
description	Critically review Elsa or framework constitution sections for enforceable gates, ambiguity, contradictions, missing exceptions, ratification readiness, and source-of-truth drift. Use when a user asks to question, revise, finalize, ratify, or challenge constitution/architecture rules.
argument-hint	Constitution section or topic
compatibility	Requires .specify/memory constitutions and docs
metadata	{"author":"elsa-foundation","source":"docs/skills/catalog.md#critical-constitution-review"}
user-invocable	true
disable-model-invocation	false

User Input

$ARGUMENTS

Outline

1. Read docs/skills/catalog.md#critical-constitution-review.
2. Read the target constitution section in .specify/memory/constitution-framework.md or .specify/memory/constitution.md.
3. Read linked glossary/reference/report material only when needed to separate gate meaning from rationale/history.
4. Compare the target rule against current code reality and maps when the review asks whether it is enforceable.
5. Present findings first: ambiguity, contradiction, missing exception, non-gate material, stale draft history, or ratification blocker.
6. Propose a revision path or work unit. Do not silently rewrite constitutional meaning.

If the review produces deferred findings, update or propose an update to docs/reports/unfinished-work.md. If a finding becomes planned durable work, add or move it to the relevant program-goal bucket before implementation, or explicitly keep it none/free-flow.