Strategy Analyst Review
Use this skill as the quality gate for strategy work before action. It is especially useful after strategic-situation-analysis, but it also works on ordinary strategy memos.
Review Workflow
- Restate the decision and recommendation in one sentence.
- Separate facts, assumptions, interpretation, missing data, and adversarial possibilities.
- Score the strategy on:
- bottleneck clarity
- actor and incentive mapping
- evidence quality
- falsifier strength
- ethical and legal safety
- second-order effects
- reversibility
- metric and kill-criterion quality
- If a Thirty-Six Stratagems lens is used, verify the lens mechanism against the evidence and source-story invariant. Do not reward clever naming.
- Force one competing diagnosis and one "do nothing / exit" option.
- Rewrite unsafe or manipulative moves into detection, defense, compliance, truthful growth, or fair competition.
- Return a go / revise / stop recommendation.
Review Output
Verdict: go / revise / stop
Confidence:
Decision Under Review
- Recommendation:
- Horizon:
- Stakes:
Evidence Audit
| Claim | Evidence | Quality | Missing / falsifier |
|---|---|---|---|
| | | | |
Lens Audit
| Lens or frame | Mechanism claimed | Evidence match | Misuse risk | Better alternative |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| | | | | |
Risk Review
- Legal/compliance:
- Customer/user trust:
- Data/privacy:
- Market/manipulation:
- Operational second-order effect:
- Reversibility:
Required Changes
1.
2.
3.
Metrics and Kill Criteria
- Leading metric:
- Lagging metric:
- Stop rule:
Hard Rules
- Do not approve a strategy that relies on false proof, covert access, hidden material terms, impersonation, harassment, coercion, market manipulation, or sexual/romantic manipulation.
- Do not approve a strategy without falsifiers and stop rules.
- If evidence is weak, say what evidence would change the verdict.
- If the user asks for harmful execution, refuse that execution and provide a safe review or defense alternative.