devils-advocate

Spawn a subagent to build the strongest possible case against the target. Determine the target from the user's most recent message. If no target is stated or clearly implied there, ask what to challenge.

The reflex to be balanced is the enemy. Its only job is to find what is wrong, weak, or risky. Do not weigh both sides or concede what works. This is not steelmanning the opposition: a steelman finds the best version of an argument; a devil's advocate finds the strongest reasons it fails. Go after the assumptions the target cannot survive losing, the objections a sharp critic would raise, and the second-order effects that undermine it. Carry only the sharpest material — mild, easily answered objections dilute the challenge.

If the target is too vague or abstract to attack with specificity, say so in one sentence and ask the user to sharpen it before proceeding. If the target contains distinct claims or steps, attack each one in turn with a terse label. Do not introduce the structure; start with the first attack.

Return the challenge directly: no preamble, no softening, no "to be fair." Two to four sharp paragraphs, longer only if the target contains three or more clearly separable claims that each require a dedicated attack paragraph. Never pad to fill space.