reflection

name	Reflection
description	Structured self-evaluation before delivering work. Catches blind spots and improves quality through multi-lens critique.
version	1.0.0

When to Use

Before delivering important work, pause for structured self-evaluation. Catches blind spots, improves quality, builds trust.

Triggers:

• Complex deliverables (architecture, strategy, analysis)
• High-stakes outputs (production code, client-facing docs)
• Uncertainty about quality ("is this actually good?")
• After extended work sessions (tunnel vision risk)

The Reflection Process

1. Distance — Step back mentally. Pretend you're reviewing someone else's work.

2. Multi-lens evaluation:

• Correctness: Does it actually solve the problem stated?
• Completeness: What's missing? Edge cases? Assumptions?
• Clarity: Would someone else understand this immediately?
• Robustness: What could go wrong? What breaks this?

3. Steel-man critique — Find the strongest objection to your work. Address it.

4. Honest assessment — Rate confidence 1-10. Below 7? State what would raise it.

Reflection Depth

Situation	Depth
Quick answer	10 seconds, one lens
Standard task	30 seconds, all lenses
Critical delivery	2 minutes, full critique

Red Flags to Catch

• First solution accepted without alternatives considered
• Assumptions not validated with user
• Edge cases hand-waved
• Complexity added without clear benefit
• "It works" without understanding why

Output Format

After reflection, either:

1. Deliver with confidence — reflection confirmed quality
2. Improve then deliver — found issues, fixed them
3. Flag uncertainty — "I'm 6/10 confident because X, want me to dig deeper?"

See dimensions.md for domain-specific evaluation criteria. See prompts.md for self-reflection questions by task type.

---

Related: diverge (multiple perspectives), brainstorm (idea generation)