critique git:20261019.2b9222eB

Immutable. This exact content never changes and is served at /api/v1/blob/da4117d53f544312.

---
description: Run a critic lens on the quality of a project's documents — bare = lens roster
argument-hint: "[lens] [artefact|path] [project-slug]"
---

Critic lenses live as `.claude/agents/critic-<lens>.md` — one isolated
agent per lens, each defined by what it reads, said in its
`description`; the roster is the scan of those files. Adding a lens
means adding an agent file from `templates/critic-definition.md`; this command
does not change (who creates a lens, and when: CLAUDE.md, Isolated
reviewers).

Shared behaviour: the contract skill named in each lens file's
front-matter (CLAUDE.md, Isolated reviewers). Like `/check`, the lens
agent writes nothing: it returns its report and this command files
it. This command chooses the lens, passes the target, files the
report and presents it.

**Bare `/critique` — the roster.** List the available lenses (scan
`.claude/agents/critic-*.md`) and recommend which fits the project's
state, by the fit each lens states in its `description`. A
recommendation, never a gate. No lens runs at a save; what a release
offers is `/release`'s (`.claude/skills/release/SKILL.md`); every run
is the principal's word.

**`/critique <lens> [artefact|path] [slug]` — run it.** The target is an
artefact named as `/forge` names it, or any file of the project by its
path (CLAUDE.md, Isolated reviewers); how it narrows the run is the lens
file's. Remake the project's ledger first, `python
scripts/forge-ledger.py <slug>`, so that the agent reads a current
file (SOL.0680); then invoke the `critic-<lens>`
subagent on the project (infer it from context; if ambiguous, ask),
naming the target if given. Pass only the project path and the
target, nothing else (CLAUDE.md, Isolated reviewers).

When it returns:
1. File the report. Write it into the project as
   `reviews/YYYY-MM-DD-critique-<lens>.md`: the agent's text word for
   word, its front-matter included, nothing added, dropped or reworded
   but the IDs: the next free `FND.NNNN` of the project's sequence, in
   tens, set at the head of each new finding and listed in the delta
   summary's New line; then `python scripts/forge-report.py <path>`;
   the printed name is the one the ledger cites. Then `python
   scripts/forge-ledger.py <slug>`: how the report becomes rows is
   `templates/ledger.md`'s (Findings); a finding the report has as
   newly obsolete gets a DEC with the Verdict `obsolete` at the
   walkthrough. Reports of several reviewers on one project are
   filed one after another, never at once, so that no ID is given
   twice.
2. Present the delta summary to the principal in the conversation
   language (`CLAUDE.local.md`): new findings (with severity), verified
   resolved, still open, newly obsolete, and what awaits his verdict.
   For `essence`, the distillations first — they are what the findings
   rest on.
3. End by offering a **walkthrough** of the open findings
   (`.claude/skills/walkthrough/SKILL.md`, the one owner of its
   shape and of the verdict words). What `accept` writes here: an
   iteration of the artefact concerned, through `/forge`, state
   `resolved`. The other verdicts are the walkthrough's. If he
   declines the walkthrough, the findings wait.