planning-report-critiquelisted

# Planning report critique Someone has written an assessment and you need to know what is wrong with it — because you are deciding whether to challenge it, appeal it, respond to it at committee, or send it back. ## Dependencies - **`planning-report-quality`** — this skill does not re-analyse. It runs that skill and reports a filtered, ordered subset of its output. - `planning-document-search` — for the report itself and the documents it relies on. Declare these; never copy their content in. ## This skill is a presentation layer The analysis is entirely `planning-report-quality`'s. What this skill adds is **judgement about what to raise**, and the discipline to leave the rest out. That division matters. A defect list built independently of the measurement would drift from it, and you would end up maintaining two definitions of "defect". Here there is one: a finding is a claim that failed the accuracy test, or an immaterial consideration given weight, or a material consideration omitted, or a weight divergence that changes the balance. ## Findings and observations are different things **A true observation is never a fault in the author.** Identifying something correctly is not a defect, and whether it is relevant or carries weight is a separate judgement made later and by someone else. So the output has two headed sections and they do different work: | | Contains | Belongs to the reader who | |---|---|---| | **Findings** | the reasoning is wrong on the law, or cont