challenge-swarm

/challenge-swarm

Take an existing design, spec, or plan and subject it to independent expert scrutiny, then map where the experts disagree. Multiple genuinely independent perspectives surface holes any single review pass misses — and the disagreements between perspectives are the highest-value output, not the consensus. Mechanism adapted from Stanford's STORM (perspective-diverse, grounded multi-agent synthesis); the grounding corpus is the artifact's source material — the codebase, when there is one.

This command does not produce a new design. The planning workflow already exists (/atomic-plan). The deliverable is a challenge report the user folds back into the design — surgical findings only, never a rewrite.

Workflow position

hunch → /gather-evidence → /pressure-test → /atomic-plan → /challenge-swarm → /subagent-implementation
        (does it hold?)    (you defend it    (write design   (isolated experts    (build it)
                            in dialogue)      + spec)          attack it)

Parse arguments

$ARGUMENTS may be empty, a topic phrase, or a target document reference. Classify with this precedence (first match wins, single pass):

1. Token starts with @ → strip the @, treat the remainder as a path. Resolve relative to cwd; absolute allowed. Must exist and end in .md → target document. Otherwise print one line: path '<x>' not found (or not markdown) — pass a design/spec path or topic. and continue classifying the rest.
2. Token ends in .md and exists on disk → target document (same checks).
3. Anything else → topic phrase. Glob docs/design/*<slug>*.md and docs/spec/*<slug>*.md. One match → use it, confirm in one line. Multiple → numbered list, typed selection. Zero → ask for a path.
4. Empty $ARGUMENTS → list candidates: design/spec files changed on the current branch (git diff --name-only <base>...HEAD -- docs/design docs/spec), newest first, numbered, typed selection. No candidates → ask: "Which document should the swarm challenge?"