Commands

Review

Structured quality assessment

Review cross-references your document against vault content, checking completeness, accuracy, clarity, and consistency — then delivers structured feedback organized by severity.

How it works

Thorough review with
structured, actionable feedback

Open a file and run /review. The system reads the full document, cross-references your vault, and produces a structured assessment: Summary, Strengths, Issues by severity, and Suggestions.

Structured Format

Every review follows the same structure: Summary, Strengths, Issues (Critical → Major → Minor), and Suggestions. Consistent, scannable, complete.

Summary → 3 Strengths → 1 Critical, 2 Major, 4 Minor → 5 Suggestions

Cross-Referenced

Claims are checked against your vault. Inconsistencies with other documents flagged. Missing citations identified. The review knows your whole body of work.

⚠ Claim on p.3 contradicts findings in market-analysis-q2.md

Severity Tiers

Issues ranked Critical (blocks publication), Major (should fix), and Minor (nice to fix). You know exactly what to fix first and what can wait.

Critical: Missing regulatory disclosure (required by SOX §302)

Specific Suggestions

Not just what's wrong — specific suggestions for how to improve. Restructure this section, add this citation, clarify this claim, merge these paragraphs.

Suggestion: Move conclusion to paragraph 1 (pyramid principle)

Systematic, not subjective

Not "LGTM."
Structured assessment that finds what humans miss.

Casual Review
Skim the document quickly
Flag obvious issues
Miss contradictions with other docs
'Looks good' with vague suggestions
Ask QP
Full document read with vault cross-reference
Issues categorized by severity: Critical → Major → Minor
Contradictions with other vault documents surfaced automatically
Specific suggestions with before/after examples

Any document worth reviewing

Thorough review for documents that matter.

Any document heading toward publication, approval, or stakeholders.

Legal Documents

Contracts, briefs, policies — checked against precedent and regulation

Research Papers

Methodology, citations, conclusions — checked for rigor

Marketing Copy

Claims, tone, consistency — checked against brand guidelines

Technical Specs

Completeness, feasibility, consistency — checked against codebase

Financial Reports

Figures, forecasts, assumptions — checked against source data

Strategic Plans

Completeness, feasibility, internal consistency, evidence quality

Ready to review?

Open a file in the Workspace and run /review from the Conductor.

Get AskQP