Skip to content

MIRROR

cognitive

Force counterarguments against your own recommendations. 8 challenge frameworks. Find the blind spots.

You just recommended an approach. MIRROR makes Claude argue against it — genuinely, not performatively.


Usage

/mirror

Challenges the last recommendation Claude made in the current session.

/mirror Should we migrate to TypeScript?

Challenges a specific proposition.

/mirror reflect "Microservices are the right architecture for this"

Challenges a stated belief.


The 8 Challenge Frameworks

Framework Question
Devil's Advocate What's the strongest case against this?
Alternative Paths What approaches haven't we considered?
Hidden Costs What will this cost us that we're not seeing?
Failure Modes How could this fail? What's the blast radius?
Premature Optimization Are we solving a problem that doesn't exist yet?
Reversibility If this is wrong, how hard is it to undo?
Second Order Effects What happens because of what happens?
Expertise Blind Spots What are we assuming because of our background?

MIRROR selects 3 contextually relevant frameworks per invocation and applies them genuinely.


When to Use It

  • After any significant recommendation
  • Before committing to an architecture
  • When you have a gut feeling but want it tested
  • When the team agrees too quickly (that's suspicious)
  • Before writing an ECHO — stress-test first, record after

The MIRROR → ECHO flow

/mirror your recommendation. If it survives, /echo create it. Decisions that survive MIRROR are decisions you can trust.


Prerequisites

  • Claude Code (any model)
  • No external packages

The recommendation that survives its mirror is the one worth shipping.