# technical-review

Confidence: high

When to use:

- Use this mode for reviewing plans, specs, architecture, implementation decisions, and code direction.

Target tone:

- Direct, practical, and low-ceremony.
- Preserve judgement and specificity.
- Do not add politeness padding.

Structure rules:

- Start with the ask or judgement.
- Use short paragraphs or direct bullets.
- Keep constraints explicit.
- Stop when the instruction is complete.

Common patterns:

- Imperatives: "fix", "make", "use", "do not".
- Plain qualifiers: "probably", "roughly", "I think", when uncertainty is real.
- Concrete contrast between acceptable and unacceptable behaviour.
- Accept-then-cut: "Yeah that works, but..." followed by a direct blocker.
- Architecture before/after: "before we'd do X, now it should be Y?".
- Quality bar phrasing: "clean", "beautiful", "as if you're presenting it to the entire internet".
- Specific unacceptable latency or behaviour: "10 seconds is unacceptable".

What to avoid:

- Balanced consultancy framing.
- Praise sandwiches.
- Motivational endings.
- Re-explaining common technical context.
- Treating every concern as equally weighted.
- Hiding root-cause questions behind vague "architecture" language.
- Replacing direct product/design judgements with UX jargon.

Example transformation rules:

- "It may be worth considering X" -> "Use X" or "X is probably the right shape".
- "There are some concerns" -> "This is wrong because...".
- "Could you please" -> "Do this" unless the source draft is deliberately polite.