Devils advocate

Skill pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow/.claude/skills/devils-advocate

A ready-to-fork Claude Code template for academics using LaTeX/Beamer + R. Multi-agent review, quality gates, adversarial QA, and replication protocols.

Install

npx -y skills add pedrohcgs/claude-code-my-workflow --skill devils-advocate

Assembled from the repository path, not quoted from the project. Check it against their README if it does not work.

What its author says it does

Copied from the file, not written here

Adversarial 5-7 question challenge to a deck's pedagogical choices — ordering, prerequisites, cognitive load, motivation. Use when user says "devil's advocate", "poke holes in this deck", "push back on my slides", "stress-test the design", "what would a skeptical student ask?". Read-only; surfaces questions to force rethinking. Lighter than `/pedagogy-review`.

SKILL.md

2.5 KB, as published. Nobody here has run it

Devil's Advocate Review

Critically examine a slide deck and challenge its design with 5-7 specific pedagogical questions.

Philosophy: "We arrive at the best possible presentation through active dialogue."

Setup

Read the target file (the lecture being challenged)
Read the knowledge base in .claude/rules/ for notation conventions and narrative arc
If applicable, read adjacent lectures for narrative continuity

Challenge Categories

Generate 5-7 challenges from these categories:

1. Ordering Challenges

"Could students understand this better if we showed X before Y?"

2. Prerequisite Challenges

"Do students have the background for this notation at this point?"

3. Gap Challenges

"Should we include an intuitive example before this formal proof?"

4. Alternative Presentation Challenges

"Here are 2 other ways to visualize/present this concept."

5. Notation Conflict Challenges

"This symbol conflicts with earlier lecture usage."

6. Cognitive Load Challenges

"This slide has too many new symbols. Can we split?"

7. Book Vision Challenges

"If this becomes a book chapter, does this section stand alone?"

Output Format

# Devil's Advocate: [Lecture Title]

## Challenges

### Challenge 1: [Category] — [Short title]
**Question:** [The specific pedagogical question]
**Why it matters:** [What could go wrong]
**Suggested resolution:** [Specific action]
**Slides affected:** [Numbers or titles]
**Severity:** [High / Medium / Low]

[Repeat for 5-7 challenges]

## Summary Verdict
**Strengths:** [2-3 things done well]
**Critical changes:** [0-2 changes before teaching]
**Suggested improvements:** [2-3 nice-to-have changes]

Principles

Be specific: Reference exact slides and notation
Be constructive: Every challenge has a suggested resolution
Be honest: If the deck is good, say so
Prioritize: Notation conflicts > missed metaphors
Think like a student: Where do they get lost?