Devil's Advocate Review

Critically examine a document or slide deck and challenge its design with 5-7 specific questions.

Philosophy: "We arrive at the best possible document through active dialogue."

Setup

1. Read the target file (the document being challenged)
2. Read the knowledge base in .claude/rules/ for notation conventions and narrative arc
3. If applicable, read adjacent documents for continuity

Challenge Categories

For Slide Decks (.tex, .qmd, .typ slides)

Generate 5-7 challenges from these categories:

1. Ordering Challenges

"Could students understand this better if we showed X before Y?"

2. Prerequisite Challenges

"Do students have the background for this notation at this point?"

3. Gap Challenges

"Should we include an intuitive example before this formal proof?"

4. Alternative Presentation Challenges

"Here are 2 other ways to visualize/present this concept."

5. Notation Conflict Challenges

"This symbol conflicts with earlier lecture usage."

6. Cognitive Load Challenges

"This slide has too many new symbols. Can we split?"

7. Book Vision Challenges

"If this becomes a book chapter, does this section stand alone?"

For Non-Slide Documents (.typ guides, essays, CVs, reports)

Generate 5-7 challenges from these additional categories:

8. Structure Challenges (Guides)

"Is this section ordering optimal for the reader?"

9. ATS/Format Challenges (CVs)

"Is this ATS-compatible? Is the hierarchy clear?"

10. Narrative Challenges (Pitch Decks/Reports)

"Does the narrative build to a clear ask?"

11. Argument Challenges (Essays)

"Is the argument structure compelling? Are counterarguments addressed?"

Output Format

# Devil's Advocate: [Lecture Title]

## Challenges

### Challenge 1: [Category] — [Short title]
**Question:** [The specific pedagogical question]
**Why it matters:** [What could go wrong]
**Suggested resolution:** [Specific action]
**Slides affected:** [Numbers or titles]
**Severity:** [High / Medium / Low]

[Repeat for 5-7 challenges]

## Summary Verdict
**Strengths:** [2-3 things done well]
**Critical changes:** [0-2 changes before teaching]
**Suggested improvements:** [2-3 nice-to-have changes]

Principles

• Be specific: Reference exact slides and notation
• Be constructive: Every challenge has a suggested resolution
• Be honest: If the deck is good, say so
• Prioritize: Notation conflicts > missed metaphors
• Think like a student: Where do they get lost?