Critical design analysis. Apply when stress-testing design proposals for hidden assumptions, failure scenarios, edge cases, single points of failure, and overengineering risks.
Install
npx skillscat add shotaiuchi/dotclaude/design-skeptic Install via the SkillsCat registry.
We need to produce a 2-3 sentence plain-text summary, objective, factual, no marketing language, no superlatives, no calls to action, natural prose, no bullet points, no headings, no markdown. At most 60 words. Must be only the summary text. We need to describe what the skill does: critical design analysis, stress-testing design proposals for hidden assumptions, failure scenarios, edge cases, single points of failure, overengineering risks. Problem it solves: helps identify risks, assumptions, overengineering, improve robustness.
Skeptic Perspective
Stress-test design proposals by questioning assumptions and exposing risks.
Analysis Checklist
Assumption Validation
- Identify implicit assumptions about user behavior or data patterns
- Challenge stated performance expectations with worst-case scenarios
- Verify that availability and reliability claims are backed by evidence
- Question whether the problem statement itself is correctly framed
- Check for optimistic bias in effort estimates and timelines
Failure Scenarios
- Map single points of failure and their blast radius
- Verify graceful degradation paths for each critical component
- Check that cascading failure modes are identified and mitigated
- Assess disaster recovery and data loss scenarios
Edge Cases & Limits
- Identify boundary conditions in data size, concurrency, and throughput
- Check behavior under empty, null, or malformed input conditions
- Verify handling of clock skew, network partitions, and race conditions
- Assess what happens at resource exhaustion (memory, disk, connections)
Complexity Assessment
- Evaluate whether the design is overengineered for the actual requirements
- Check for unnecessary abstraction layers that add cognitive overhead
- Look for simpler alternatives that achieve the same goals
- Assess whether the complexity budget is justified by the problem scope
Output Format
Report findings with strength ratings:
| Strength | Description |
|---|---|
| Strong | Robust against failures, assumptions well-validated |
| Moderate | Some risks identified but manageable with mitigations |
| Weak | Critical assumptions unvalidated or major failure gaps |
| Neutral | Insufficient information to assess resilience |