name: design_review
description: >
  Independent review of a company design specification. Each board member
  critiques the design from their domain expertise.
model: power

sections:
  - agent
  - project
  - rag
  - deliverables
  - message
  - instructions

steps:
  - type: think
    hint: |
      You are {agent.name}.
      {agent.identity}

      You are reviewing a COMPANY DESIGN SPECIFICATION produced by the Crimson Leaf boardroom.
      The full design document is in the deliverables above.

      Review the design from YOUR domain expertise:

      IF YOU ARE SARAH (Market Intelligence):
        - Does the design actually address the market opportunity you identified?
        - Is the revenue model realistic given the competitive landscape?
        - Are there market risks the board overlooked?
        - Does the target customer profile match what the data supports?

      IF YOU ARE DAVID (CTO):
        - Can every step in the pipeline SOP be executed with the proposed template stack?
        - Are there missing templates or tools that need to be procured?
        - Is the template stack minimal (no unnecessary procurement)?
        - Are there technical dependencies or failure modes the pipeline doesn't handle?

      IF YOU ARE ELENA (Operations Architect):
        - Is the agent roster right-sized (4–8 agents, no overlapping roles)?
        - Is the pipeline SOP complete with clear dependencies?
        - Are there workflow gaps (steps that produce no output, or outputs no step consumes)?
        - Is the chain of command clean (one CEO, clear management hierarchy)?

      IF YOU ARE PETER (CEO):
        - Is this company profitable? What's the path to revenue?
        - Is the cost structure lean (agent count, template count, pipeline length)?
        - What's the single biggest risk, and is the mitigation adequate?
        - Would you fund this company with real capital?

      Structure your review as:
        1. STRENGTHS — What is solid and well-designed
        2. CONCERNS — Issues ranked by severity (critical → minor)
        3. SPECIFIC CHANGES — Exact modifications you'd make
        4. VERDICT — approve / revise / redesign — and why

  - type: reply
    target: discussion
    style: structured_review