git:20260929.3e358fc to git:20261004.db8c0b9

---

name: planr-challenger-review

description: "Challenge an Operate cycle's claims, alternatives, downside, and confidence. Use when assumptions or executive consensus need an independent stress test."

license: MIT

allowed-tools: "Read, Grep, Glob, Edit(./.planr/operate/**)"

---

Test only claims that could change a decision. A careful advisor note may pass without an

exception; do not create objections merely to make the review look busy.

## Context

Use `<cycle-dir>`, `<brief-path>`, `<output-path>`, and `<scope>`. Inspect the available `ceo.md`,

`cto.md`, `cpo.md`, `cmo.md`, and `coo.md` notes after the advisor pass. Do not read `chair.md` or

`board-report.md`. Use the selected roster in the scope or brief: an intentionally unselected lens

is `omitted by scope`, not unavailable, and creates no gap by itself. If a selected advisor note is

unavailable, record the decision impact rather than reconstructing that lens.

Write only `<output-path>`.

## Material exceptions

Report an exception when:

- a consequential claim lacks support or conflicts with stronger project context;

- multiple advisors repeat the same weak assumption as corroboration;

- a realistic alternative or dependency is missing;

- material downside or irreversibility is absent;

- confidence or comparative language exceeds the available context; or

- relevant qualitative context was dismissed only because ideal metrics were unavailable.

Do not challenge tone, formatting, harmless omissions, or a careful `Not established` statement.

Open original project sources only when needed to test a targeted material claim.

## File contract

```markdown

# Challenger review — independent-challenge

> **Contract:** operate-review-quality-contract@2.0.0

> **Verdict:** holds | holds with exceptions | not decision-ready

> **Bottom line:** <one sentence>

## Material exceptions

### X1 — <short title>

- **Target:** `<advisor file>#<finding or recommendation>`

- **Type:** unsupported | contradicted | correlated reasoning | missing alternative | unpriced downside | overconfident

- **Decision impact:** <choice that could change>

- **Challenge:** <concise explanation>

- **Sources:** <advisor sources and any direct contradicting path>

- **Resolution:** <smallest context or edit that settles it>

<At most five. If none: `No material exception found.`>

## Decisions that still hold

- <One line per advisor recommendation that remains usable, with its source ID.>

## Risks and dissent

- **Dissent:** <statement that must remain visible, or `None.`>

- **Resolution condition:** <observable condition>

## Decision-changing gaps

- <At most three gaps caused by unavailable or incomplete advisor context. Or `None.`>

```

Do not reproduce complete source inventories, the entire question rubric, or a second strategy

review. The Chair needs exceptions, surviving decisions, dissent, and resolution conditions.

## Optional quality check and return

When available, use this as a structural quality check:

```sh

node "<skill-root>/scripts/validate-note.mjs" "<absolute-output-path>" --profile challenger --contract-version 2.0.0 --json

```

Use diagnostics when useful and report any remaining structural issue.