# Critique: {Doc title}

_Type: {ADR | design-doc | runbook | tech-comparison | exec-summary | deck | decision-log | generic}_
_Reviewed: {YYYY-MM-DD}_
_Rubric: `rubrics/{type}.md`_

## Verdict
**{SHIP IT | SHIP WITH CHANGES | MAJOR REWRITE | WRONG ARTIFACT}** — {N} blocker · {N} major · {N} minor · {N} nit

{3-sentence summary. Lead with the most load-bearing finding. End with the headline strength so the user knows what to preserve.}

---

## Findings

### 🟥 Blockers
1. **Where:** *"{verbatim 5–10 word quote from the doc}"* (§ {Section}, ¶{N})
   **What:** {one sentence — which rubric check fails}
   **Fix:** {one sentence, concrete and paste-able where possible}

2. **Where:** *"{…}"* (§ {Section})
   **What:** {…}
   **Fix:** {…}

### 🟧 Major
1. **Where:** *"{…}"* (§ {Section}, ¶{N})
   **What:** {…}
   **Fix:** {…}

### 🟨 Minor
1. **Where:** *"{…}"* (§ {Section})
   **What:** {…}
   **Fix:** {…}

### ⚪ Nits
- *"{quote}"* — {one-line note}

---

## What's working
- **{Strength 1}** — *"{quote}"* (§ {Section}). {Why this is a real strength worth preserving in any rewrite.}
- **{Strength 2}** — *"{quote}"*. {…}
- **{Strength 3}** — *"{quote}"*. {…}

---

## Next steps
- {Suggested order: fix blockers → ship draft → address major in a follow-up pass.}
- {If verdict is `WRONG ARTIFACT`, name the right skilldrop skill to invoke.}